Madras High Court
Ameen vs State By on 17 August, 2022
Crl.R.C.No.1034 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.08.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
Crl.R.C.No.1034 of 2015
Ameen ... Petitioner
Vs.
State by
The Inspector of Police,
G1, Town West Police Station,
Udhagamandalam,
Nilgiris District.
Crime No.52 of 2007 ... Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 397 & 401 of
Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the judgment of the learned District
Sessions Judge, Uthagamandalam, The Nilgiris in Crl.A.No.5 of 2011 by the
judgment dated 14.07.2015 in modifying the conviction and sentence passed
by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthagamandalam, Nilgiris District made
in C.C.No.164 of 2007.
For Petitioner : Mr. T. Shanmugam
For Respondent : Mr. N.S. Suganthan,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.1034 of 2015
ORDER
The petitioner herein found guilty of offences under Sections
457(i) and 380 IPC. The trial Court sentenced him for each offences to
undergo three years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/-. On
appeal, it was modified to one year rigorous imprisonment.
2. Taking note of the fact that when the Court questioned the
accused about the sentence, he has promised to reform himself.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the accused / petitioner states
that till date, the petitioner has not not come under adverse notice of the
police, he has reformed that the petitioner is living with the family and
would submit that the petitioner has already been in prison for nearly 45
days and that may be taken as period of sentence.
4. It is a case where the prosecution was able to prove that gold
jewels marked as MO1 to MO10 were stolen from the house of P.W.1. The
jewels, totally 75.480 grams worth Rs.30,000/- were pledged to different
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.1034 of 2015
persons. The witnesses from whom the MOs were recovered, has identified
this witness and others who had pledged the jewels with them, on the
request of this petitioner / accused.
5. This Court finds that this petitioner had admitted his guilt even
at the time of investigation and based on his confession statement, the jewels
pledged at various places was recovered, the motorcycle which was
purchased out of the sale proceeds of the stolen jewels was recovered and
the earring given to his wife and concealed in his house which was recovered
during the house search. These recovery are based on the information given
by the accused in the course of investigation and with the exclusive
knowledge of the accused. Therefore, this Court finds no error in the
judgment of the Courts below, convicting the accused.
6. However, as pleaded by the learned counsel for the petitioner,
the good conduct of the accused subsequent to the incident which has been
taken note by the lower appellate Court for modifying the terms of
imprisonment is further considered and the period of sentence is modified to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.1034 of 2015
three months simple imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/- for offences under
Sections 497(i) and 380 IPC. The period of sentence shall run concurrently.
The period of sentence already undergone, ordered to be set off. 15 days
time is granted for surrender, failing which the respondent-police shall
secure the accused and commit him to prison.
7. In the result, the criminal revision case is partly allowed.
17.08.2022
AT
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes/No
Speaking / Non-speaking
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.1034 of 2015
Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
AT
To
1.The District Sessions Judge, Uthagamandalam, The Nilgiris.
2.The Judicial Magistrate, Uthagamandalam, Nilgiris District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
G1, Town West Police Station,
Udhagamandalam,
Nilgiris District..
4.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
Crl.R.C.No.1034 of 2015
17.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
