RAJA @ RAJKAMAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants in Crl.A.No.628 of 2011 are accused Nos.4, 6, 7 and 8; appellant in Crl.A.No.661 of 2011 is accused No.3; appellant in Crl.A.No.827 of 2011 is accused No.5 and appellant in Crl.A.No.369 of 2014 is accused No.2 in S.C.No.117 of 2010 on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur, Thiruvarur District, and they stand convicted for the offence under Section 395 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- each in default to undergo six months simple imprisonment. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the appellants in all the criminal appeals/accused Nos.4, 6, 7, 8, 3, 5 and 2 respectively have preferred the above four Criminal Appeals before this Court.

(2.) Totally, there were eight accused in this case. In respect of the first accused namely, Panneer @ Panneerselvam, the case was split up and it was taken on file as P.R.C.No.20 of 2010. Pending appeal, since the fourth accused namely, Raja @ Rajkamal, who is the first appellant in Crl.A.No.628 of 2011 had died, the charges against him are abated. Now, this Court has to consider the criminal appeals only in respect of Accused Nos.2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8.

(3.) The case of the prosecution is that on 25.01.2010 at about 10.00 p.m., at Andiyampalayam, Coimbatore District, the de facto complainant namely, Malarvizhi (P.W.1) and her Son Karthik (P.W.2) were sitting in the hall and watching Television, and at that time, all the accused with a criminal conspiracy to commit dacoity in the house of P.W.1, came in a Tata Sumo bearing Registration Number TN-02-K-7777 and while the third accused Balu alias Balamurugan was standing in the Tata Sumo vehicle, the other 7 accused have entered into the front gate which was unlocked. At that time, accused Nos.1 and 2, by showing knife, have criminally intimidated P.W.1-Malarvizhi and P.W.2-Karthick and tied their hands behind their body and committed looting the property including thali chain, ear ring, nose stud and taken away a DVD player and also decamped with the gold jewels to the tune of Rs. 2,25,000/- and also taken away a silver kolusu, ladies watch and other items of listed property and thereby, committed the offence under Section 395 of I.P.C. Hence, P.W.1 has given a complaint before the respondent police and on the basis of the said complaint, the respondent police has registered a case in Crime No.29 of 2010 for the offence under Section 395 of IPC.