S ABDUL WAHAB Vs. THAJUDEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (This Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 378(4) of Criminal Procedure Code against the Order of acquittal dated 17.05.2002 made in Appeal No.253(A) of 1998 by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.1), Chennai.) This Criminal Appeal has been preferred on special leave under Section 378(4) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment of the lower appellate court, namely the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.1), Chennai dated 17.05.2002 made in Criminal Appeal No.253(A) of 1998.

(2.) A case was instituted on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai-8 as C.C.No.3024/1996 based on a private complaint for an alleged offence punishable under Section 420 r/w 34 IPC against the respondents 1 to 3 herein. In the said case, after trial, the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, pronounced a judgment on 14.12.1998 holding the first respondent herein guilty of an offence punishable under Section 420 IPC, second respondent herein guilty of an offence punishable under Section 420 r/w 109 IPC and the third respondent herein guilty of an offence punishable under Section 420 r/w 34 IPC, convicted them for the above said offences respectively and imposed the following punishments on them:- i) The first respondent/first accused was sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment; ii) The second respondent/second accused was sentenced to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment; and iii) The third respondent/third accused was sentenced to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment. (No fine was imposed on any one of the respondents herein.)

(3.) THE gist of the complaint was that all the three accused cheated the appellant by executing the sale agreement in respect of a property which was already sold to a third party and by executing a sale agreement in respect of the garments factory including its machineries whereas all the machineries had been removed from the said factory. THE trial court chose to frame a charge against all the three accused for an offence punishable under Section 420 IPC r/w Section 34 IPC. THE respondents herein (accused) denied the charge and pleaded not guilty. In the light of such plea, the trial court conducted trial in which four witnesses, including the appellant herein, were examined as P.W.1 to P.W.4 and 17 documents were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P17 on the side of the appellant herein/complainant in order to prove the charge against the respondents herein/accused. When the accused were questioned under Section 313(i)(b) Cr.P.C regarding the incriminating materials, they denied them stating that they were falsely implicated and reiterated that they were not guilty. No witness was examined and no document was marked on the side of the respondents herein/accused.