Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Iyyammal vs The State Represented By
2021 Latest Caselaw 14267 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 14267 Mad
Judgement Date : 16 July, 2021

Madras High Court
Iyyammal vs The State Represented By on 16 July, 2021
                                                                           CRL.R.C.(MD).No.791 of 2017


                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                DATED :16.07.2021

                                                       CORAM

                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP

                                           CRL.R.C.(MD).No.791 of 2017

                Iyyammal
                W/o.Selvaraj                                        ... Petitioner

                                                         Vs.
                The State Represented by
                The Sub Inspector of Police,
                DCB Police Station,
                Tuticorin
                Tuticorin District.                              ... Respondent
                (Cr.No.182 of 2003)

                PRAYER: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Sections 379 r/w 401 of
                Cr.P.C, to call for records to the judgement dated 19.09.2017 in C.A.No.55 of
                2016 passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Court, Tuticorin, which
                confirmed the judgment of conviction and the sentence passed by the Judicial
                Magistrate Court No.1, Tuticorin in C.C.No.57 of 2004 dated 14.10.2016 and
                set aside the same.


                                      For Petitioner    : Mr.B.Rajesh Saravanan

                                      For Respondent     : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar
                                                           Government Advocate(Crl.Side)



                1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                         CRL.R.C.(MD).No.791 of 2017


                                                   ORDER

When the case came up for hearing on 28.06.2021, Mr.B.Rajesh

Saravanan, the learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that the

petitioner namely Iyyammal had been convicted for the offence under Sections

468 and 471 of IPC for altering her +2 mark sheet conducted by the Tamil Nadu

Higher Secondary Education, to obtain admission in college. While undergoing

her degree, the same was found out by the College Authorities. Therefore, the

case has been filed.

2. The case has been registered by the District Crime Branch,

Thoothukudi and the investigation officer completed the investigation and filed

a final report before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thoothukudi and the

same was taken on file in C.C.No.57 of 2004. The learned Judicial Magistrate

No.I, Thoothukudi by judgment dated 09.02.2004 convicted the accused to

undergo 2 years of simple imprisonment with the fine of Rs.100/- for the

offence under Section 468 of IPC and another one year simple imprisonment

with a fine of Rs.100/- for the offence under Section 471 of IPC.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CRL.R.C.(MD).No.791 of 2017

3. Against the order of conviction, the accused preferred an appeal in

C.A.No.55 of 2016 on the file of the learned II Additional Sessions Court,

Thoothukudi. After hearing the arguments, the learned II Additional Session

Court Thoothukudi had confirmed the judgment of the learned Judicial

Magistrate No.I, Thoothukudi and dismissed the appeal.

4. Against the dismissal of the C.A.No.55 of 2016 dated 19.09.2017, this

Criminal Revision Petition has been filed.

5. When the Crl.R.C(MD).No.791 of 2017 was taken up for final

disposal, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner sought indulgence of

this Court that he does not want to persecute the revision. The learned counsel

pleads for a specific request. He would submit that the accused had already

undergone imprisonment prior to the conviction and the period of remand

already undergone by the petitioner may be set-off.

6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) objected the same and

sought time to verify the antecedents of the revision petitioner, through the

SHO concerned police Station. Hence, this case was adjourned to 16.07.2021.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CRL.R.C.(MD).No.791 of 2017

7. In the mean while, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner was

directed to produce the revision petitioner personally before the learned

Registrar Judicial of this Court along with proof of identity and also an

affidavit with regard to she has does not have any other case. The learned

Government Advocate (Crl.Side) was directed to verify through the SHO of the

police concerned regarding the antecedents of the petitioner herein. The

learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) was advised to direct the SHO of the

Police concerned to appear before this Court along with relevant records of this

case.

8. As per the direction of this Court, the revision petitioner had appeared

along with proof of identity and affidavits and Mrs.T.Vanitha Rani, Inspector of

Police, District Crime Branch, Thoothukudi had also appeared before this Court

along with a report, wherein it is stated that she has enquired the petitioner and

this accused does not have any bad antecedents.

9. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner had filed an affidavit of

the petitioner that he shall not commit any offence in future and also submit

that he committed such mistake at the age of 21 and now she had married and

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CRL.R.C.(MD).No.791 of 2017

she is living with her two children. Therefore, he seeks indulgence of this

Court to consider her case sympathetically.

10. The affidavit filed by the revision petitioner and the report of the

Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Thoothukudi shall form part of the

record.

11. Considering the present circumstance and the request of the learned

counsel for the revision petitioner and also the report filed by the Inspector of

Police, District Crime Branch, Thoothukudi, this Court is inclined to consider

this case sympathetically.

12. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction dated 19.09.2017 in C.A.No.

55 of 2016 passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Court, Tuticorin,

confirming the judgment of conviction passed by the Judicial Magistrate Court

No.1, Tuticorin in C.C.No.57 of 2004 dated 14.10.2016 is confirmed. The

period of imprisonment already undergone by the revision petitioner/accused is

set off.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CRL.R.C.(MD).No.791 of 2017

13. In the result, the revision petition is partly allowed with the above

modification. No Costs.

16.07.2021

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No tta

Note:(i) In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

To,

1.The State Represented by The Sub Inspector of Police, DCB Police Station, Tuticorin Tuticorin District.

2.The learned Second Additional Sessions Court, Tuticorin,

3.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.1, Tuticorin

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ CRL.R.C.(MD).No.791 of 2017

SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP,J

tta

CRL.R.C.(MD).No.791 of 2017

16.07.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter