R CHINNADURAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In C.C.No.305 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Jayamkondam there were 13 accused. Among the 13, charge sheet was filed against A1 and A5 to A13 for the alleged offences under Sections 147, 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) of IPC. Against A2 and A4, charge sheet was filed for the alleged offences under Sections 148, 294(b), 324, 506(ii) of IPC. Against A3, charge sheet was filed under Sections 148, 294(b), 324, 326 and 506(ii) of IPC. After trial, the learned Magistrate, by judgement dated 23.10.2013, acquitted A5 to A13 under Section 248(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Trial Court admonished A1 for the proven charge under Section 323 of IPC. However, the trial Court even though admonished A1 under Section 360 of Cr.P.C., had directed payment of compensation of a sum of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to P.W.2 under Section 357 (3) of Cr.P.C.

(2.) I have heard Mr.R.Subramanian, learned counsel appearing for the Revision Petitioners and Mr.R.Sekar, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the prosecution/ respondent.

(3.) Since the issue raised in these Criminal Revision Cases is common and since they have arisen out of the same occurrence and the same judgement and conviction made in C.C.No.305 of 2012 of the Trial Court, these two Criminal Revision Cases are taken up together and decided by this common order.