Madras High Court
Sivakumar vs The State Represented By on 26 August, 2021
CRL.R.C.No.479 fo 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :26.08.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
CRL.R.C.No.479 of 2019
and
Crl.M.P.No.6772 of 2019
1.Sivakumar
S/o, Marappa
2. Marappa
S/o, Jayaramappa
3. Soundappa
S/o, Jayaramappa ... Petitioners
Versus
The State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
HUDCO Police Station,
Krishnagiri District. ...
Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 read with 401
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to set aside the judgment of the
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hosur made in Crl.A.No.55 of
2017 dated 29.04.2019 and made in C.C.No.329 of 2014 dated
03.11.2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Hosur, to the
Page No.1 of 6
http://www.judis.nic.in
CRL.R.C.No.479 fo 2019
petitioners herein.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.R.Elavarasan
for M/s.S.Sasikumar
For Respondent : Mr.S.Sugendran
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the
judgment dated 29.04.2019 passed in Crl.A.No.55 of 2017 on the file of
the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hosur, confirming the order
dated 03.11.2017 passed in C.C.No.329 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate No.II, Hosur.
2. The petitioners are the accused in C.C.No.329 of 2014 on the file
of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Hosur and the respondent police
registered the case against the petitioners for the offence under sections
294(b), 324 and 326 I.P.C and laid a charge sheet before the Judicial
Magistrate No.II, Hosur. The learned Magistrate after trial, acquitted the
petitioners for the offence under section 294(b) I.P.C however, convicted
the first and third petitioner for the offence under section 324 I.P.C and
http://www.judis.nic.in
CRL.R.C.No.479 fo 2019
sentenced to undergo two years Simple Imprisonment and to pay a fine of
Rs.2000/- in default to undergo three months Simple Imprisonment and
convicted the first and third petitioner for the offence under section 326
IPC and sentenced to undergo two years Simple Imprisonment and to pay
a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to under three months Simple Imprisonment
and convicted the second petitioner for the offence under section 324 IPC
and sentenced him to undergo two years Simple Imprisonment and to pay
a fine of Rs.2,000/- , in default to undergo three months Simple
Imprisonment.
3. Challenging the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the
petitioners filed the appeal before the Principal District and Sessions
Judge, Hosur, in Crl.A.No.55 of 2017 and the same was made over to the
Additional Sessions Judge, Hosur for the disposal. The learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Hosur after hearing the appeal, dismissed the same by
confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the
Magistrate. Again, challenging the said judgment of the appellate court, all
the accused have filed the present Revision before this Court.
http://www.judis.nic.in
CRL.R.C.No.479 fo 2019
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the
learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the
respondent.
5. The case of the prosecution is that on the date of occurrence, the
accused tried to break/eradicate the rock, which is nearby P.W.1's land,
using explosive. When he questioned the said act of the accused, the
accused scolded him and his son in filthy language and attacked them with
stones and caused injuries.
6. Originally, case was registered for the offence under section
294(b),324, and 326 IPC. The trial court found not guilt for the offence
under section 294(b) I.P.C, however found the first and third petitioner
guilty for the offence under section 324 and 326 I.P.C and found the
second petitioner guilty for the offence under section 324 IPC alone.
P.Ws.1 to 3 are the injured witnesses. Exs.P4 and P5 are the wound
certificate of the injured witness. Both the Courts found the petitioners
guilty for the abovesaid charges and convicted them. The appellate court
http://www.judis.nic.in
CRL.R.C.No.479 fo 2019
also re-appreciated the evidence and confirmed the judgment.
7. The scope of the revision is very limited and the revisional court
while dealing with the revision has to see as to whether there is any
perversity in the appreciation of evidence in the judgment. Therefore,
while deciding the revision, the Revisional Court cannot sit in the arm
chair of the appellate court and reappreciate the entire materials. On a
reading of the materials, both the Courts below passed the concurrent
judgment based on the evidence of the injured witnesses P.W.s1 to 3 and
also the medical evidence. In this case, there is no perversity in the
appreciation of evidence and there is no merit in the revision and the same
is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Revision Case is dismissed.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
26.08.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
mfa
http://www.judis.nic.in
CRL.R.C.No.479 fo 2019
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
mfa
To
1. The Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Additional District and Sessions Court,
Hosur.
2. The Judicial Magistrate No.2,
Judicial Magistrate No.2 Court,
Hosur.
3. The Inspector of Police,
HUDCO Police Station,
Krishnagiri District.
4. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
CRL.R.C.No.479 of 2019
and
Crl.M.P.No.6772 of 2019
26.08.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
