JAYAPAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRL.A.474 of 02: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of CRL.P.C. against the conviction imposed on the appellants under Section 324 I.P.C. and sentencing the 1st appellant on two counts each for a period of three years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/- on each count and in default, to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment on each count and sentencing the 2nd and 3rd appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default, to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment passed by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No,2, Salem made in S.C.No,32 of 1999, dated 22.02.2002. Prayer in CRL.R.C.No.1073 of 02: Criminal Revision filed under Sections 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. against the order of acquittal passed against the respondents 1 to 11, in respect of the charge framed against them by Judgment dated 22.02.2002 passed in S.C.No,32 of 1999 by the Additional District Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No,2, Salem and prays to set aside the order of acquittal passed under Section 235(1) of Cr.P.C. and order of re-trial of the case.) The appellants in criminal appeal No,474 of 2002, who are the Accused Nos.3, 4 and 5 in Sessions Case No,32 of 1999 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No,2, Salem, stand convicted for an offence under Section 324 IPC (1st appellant alone for two counts) and sentenced to undergo for a period of three years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2, 000/- and in default, to undergo for a further period of six months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the said conviction and sentence, the appellants/accused Nos.3, 4 and 5 have preferred the above criminal appeal.

(3.) TO prove the case, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 14 marked Exs.P.1 to P.26 and produced M.Os.1. to 12. During the course of cross-examination of witnesses, the defence has chosen to mark three documents as Exs.D.1 to 3.