Madras High Court
M.Raja vs The State Rep. By on 29 April, 2025
Author: G.Jayachandran
Bench: G.Jayachandran
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved on : 04.03.2025
Pronounced on : 29.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
Crl.A.(MD).No.415 of 2021
M.Raja ... Appellant/PW2/
brother of the deceased
Vs.
1. The State rep. By
The Inspector of Police (Crime)
Kovilpatti West Police Station,
Thoothukudi District. ...Respondent/ Complainant
(Crime No.941 of 2015)
2. R.Ramakrishnan ...Respondents / Accused
1/23
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Criminal
Procedure Code to call for the entire records pertaining to the Judgment
in S.C.No.283 of 2017 on the file of the II Additional District Sessions
Judge, Thoothukudi District, dated 19.02.2021 and set aside the same.
For Appellant : Mr.I.Pinaygash
For Respondent No.1 : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
For Respondent No.2 : Mr.K.A.Ramakrishnan
Crl.A.(MD).No.530 of 2021
State Rep. by Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court, Madurai Bench,
The Inspector of Police,
Kovilpatti West Police Station,
Thoothukudi,
(Crime No.941/2015) ... Appellant/Complainant
Vs.
Ramakrishnan ...Respondent/Accused
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 of the Criminal
Procedure Code to call for the entire records connected to the Judgment
2/23
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
in S.C.No.283 of 2017 on the file of the II Additional District Sessions
Judge, Thoothukudi District, dated 19.02.2021 and set aside the same
and convict the respondent / accused in accordance with law.
For Appellant : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
For Respondent : Mr.K.A.Ramakrishnan
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of this Court was delivered by R.POORNIMA, J.)
These Criminal Appeals are filed against the acquittal
judgement passed against the accused in the judgment dated 19.08.2021
by the II Additional District Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi District in
S.C.No.283 of 2017 by acquitted the accused for the offences punishable
under Section 341, 294(b), 302, 506(2) of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief are as follows:
(a) The complainant's husband was running a fancy store in
the name and style of 'Shruthiprabha'. On 05.12.2015, to wear a sacred
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
garland for the lord Iyyappan temple, the complainant and the deceased
went to bazaar in the splendor two-wheeler bearing registration
No.TN 69 V 7914, to get the pooja materials. In another vehicle, her
brother-in-law Raja and her grandmother Tamilselvi also followed them.
b) When the deceased vehicle approached from north to
south at Kamarajar nagar, at 8.30 pm., the Accused nos.1 and 2
intercepted the vehicle and abused her husband in a filthy languages
“Vy NjTbah kfNd 2013y; eP vd; kPJ nfhLj;j Gfhh;y ehd;
tpLjiy Mapl;Nld;> vJf;Fy ehd; NghFk;NghJk;> tUk;NghJk;
Kiwf;fpw eP capNuhL ,Ue;jh ehd; epk;kjpah tho KbahJ
NjTbah kfNd nrj;J xoplh.” and suddenly took the knife hidden
from his hip and stabbed his right chest indiscriminately. The second
accused who is a minor also took the knife hidden from his hip and he
stabbed on his abdomen and left side rib. When the deceased prevented
the said act, on his left and right wrist was fractured. He was ejected from
the vehicle. The first accused was again stabbed in his right hip and the
minor accused stabbed in his back repeatedly. The complainant and her
brother-in-law raised hue and cry. The accused showed the knife,
threatened them and flew away from the place of occurrence. She found
that her husband succumbed to his injuries. Hence, she complained to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
the Kovilpatti West Police Station.
c) P.W.15 Mr. Navaneethan, Sub Inspector of Police,
received the complaint (Ex.P1) and registered FIR (Ex.P15) in Crime no.
941 of 2015 under Sections 341, 294(b), 302, 506(ii) of IPC against the
accused and sent the original FIR to the learned Judicial Magistrate
No.II, Kovilpatti and served the copies to other officials for further
action.
d) P.W.18, Mr. Chandrasekar, Inspector of Police took up the
case for investigation and went to the place of occurrence at 23:00hrs
i.e., Manthithoppu Road, Kamarajar Nagar and prepared observation
mahazar (Ex.P6) and rough sketch (Ex.P18), in the presence of witnesses
Kannan (P.W.4) and Ramar (P.W.5). He recovered blood stained earth
(M.O.4) and ordinary earth (M.O.5) and splendor plus two wheeler
bearing Registration no. TN 69 V 7914 (M.O.3) under the recovery
mahazar (Ex.P7) and sent the material objects to the Court under
Form-95.
e) He conducted an inquest on the dead body from 0:30hrs
to 1:30hrs in the presence of Panchayathars and other witnesses and
prepared an inquest report (Ex.P19). On 05.12.2015, he recorded the
statement of witnesses and sent the dead body for postmortem through
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
Mr. John (P.W.10), Police Constable 1119. On 05.12.2015, at 8.00 a.m,
sent a request for postmortem (Ex.P4). After postmortem, he received the
dresses worn by the deceased at the time of occurrence namely a black
colour full-hand shirt (M.O.6) and a blood-stained kaavi dhothi with a
yellow colour border (M.O.7) and blood stained blue colour
undergarment (M.O.8).
f) He examined the witnesses and recorded their statements.
On 05.12.2015 at about 10.00 a.m., he arrested both the accused in the
presence of Karuppasamy (P.W.17) and Murugesan and recorded the
confession statement of the appellant under the Ex.P21 and recovered
knife (Nos-2) under Ex.P20.
g) He also received blood-stained dresses of the accused i.e.,
yellow and violet coloured checked full hand shirt (M.O.9), blood
stained violet colour Jeans pant (M.O.10), and white, black, ash coloured
checked white and red checked full hand shirt (M.O.11), and blood
stained violet colour Jeans (M.O.12) were recovered under Form-95
(Ex.P22). He sent the accused to judicial custody and the minor accused
to the Juvenile Justice Board.
h) On 10.12.2015, he enquired Dr. Ramalakshmi, who had
conducted the postmortem and she described the injuries found in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
deceased as follows:
“The following are the external injuries found in the
corpse
1) 8 cm X 5c.m. depth undetectable indentation on
the right scrotum, 5 cm above the right sternum.
2) 5 cm 3 cm X 2 cm stab wound was found in the
chest region 6 cm above the first wound.
3) A 3 cm puncture wound was found in the neck
area below the umbilicus. 3 cm x 3 cm in size.
4) A stab wound measuring 3cm x 2cm x 1cm was
found on the left chest 3 cm below the wound.
5) A 6 cm x 2 cm x 6 cm medullary lesion was found
in the abdomen 2 cm above the umbilicus.
6) A puncture wound measuring 4 cm × 3 cm x 4 cm
was found in the abdomen 5 cm below the umbilicus.
7) A 7cm dent was found in the left hip area. × 5 cm
x 2 cm in size
8) A 3 cm x 1 cm cut was found irregularly on the
right groin.
9) An undiagnosed puncture wound of 4 cm x 3 cm x
depth was found on the left groin.
10) A puncture wound measuring 3cm X 2cm X 2cm
was found on the left chest.
11) A 11 cm x 2 cm incision was found on the right
side of the abdomen.
12) Left abdominal area measuring 3cm x 2cm x 4cm
The piercing was found 6 cm below the navel.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
13) A puncture wound measuring cm x 2 cm x 2 cm
was found in the left lower groin area.
14) A puncture wound measuring 4cm x 3cm x 2cm
was found on the right hand above 11cm from the right
wrist.
15) On the right arm a puncture measuring 3cm x
2cm x 1cm was found 13cm above the wrist.
16) Found on right elbow. A 2 cm x 1cm x 1cm
puncture
17) Punch size 2 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm was found near
the right elbow.
18) The left wrist was found to be 9cm x 7cm x 1cm
along with fractured bones.
19) A puncture wound was found on the left thumb. 6
cm x 2 cm x 3 cm in size
20) A puncture wound measuring 4cm x 2cm x 0.5cm
was found on the back of the left arm.
21) A puncture wound measuring 2cm x 1cm x 1cm
was found on the left wrist.
22) A puncture wound measuring 4cm x 2cm x 1cm
was found 2cm below the left wrist.
23) A puncture wound measuring 2cm x 1 cm x 1 cm
was found on the left arm 14 cm below the left scalp.
24) A puncture wound measuring 5cm x 1 cm x 1 cm
was found on the inner side of the left arm.
25) A puncture wound measuring 4 cm x 2 cm x 6 cm
was found on the posterior part of the left chest.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
26) A puncture wound measuring 5 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm
was found on the right wrist.
Examination of internal organs
1) On examination of the bones, the rib in the right
chest was broken and the ribs were fractured. The left ribs
were normal.
2) Pulmonary examination revealed a 6cm x 2cm x
1cm cut in the right lung.
3) The mandible appeared normal with no bone
damage.
4) The stomach was empty.
5) The heart, liver, lungs, kidney, and spleen were
seen pale.
6) The small intestine was empty. Colon was filled
with air. The bladder was empty. Examination of the skull
revealed no damage to the skull. The meninges were intact.
The brain was pale.
Within 12 to 18 hours of autopsy, the death may have
been due to bleeding and shock.”
i) The Investigating Officer sent a request letter to the
learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kovilpatti (Ex.P.8) to send the material
objects for chemical analysis.
j) Since he was transferred to another station, and handed
over the files to P.W.20, Mr. Raghupathi Raja. The P.W.20 had examined
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
all the witnesses and obtained a certificate from the TANGEDCO
(Ex.P23).
k) After examination of all necessary witnesses and
recording their statements, the P.W.20 completed the enquiry and filed a
final report against the accused under Sections 341, 294(b), 302, 506(ii)
of IPC and sent the same to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II,
Kovilpatti.
3. On receipt of the records, learned Judicial Magistrate
No.II, Thoothukudi took up the case in P.R.C.No.24 of 2016 and issued
summons to the accused. After the appearance of the accused, copies of
the entire records were furnished to them free of cost under Section
207 Cr.P.C.
4. Since the offence was exclusively triable by the Sessions
Court, the learned Judicial Magistrate committed the case records to the
Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi, under Section
209(A) Cr.P.C. for further action.
5. The Principal District Judge, Thoothukudi received the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
case records, numbered as S.C.No.283 of 2017 and made it over to the
learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi, for
disposal according to law.
6. After receipt of the case records, the learned IInd
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi framed charges
against the accused under Sections 341, 294(b), 302, 506(ii) of IPC. The
charges were read over and explained to the accused. The accused denied
the charges and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the case was posted for
trial.
7. On the side of the prosecution, P.W.1 to P.W.20 were
examined and Exs.P1 to Exs.P.23 were marked. Material Objects M.O.1
to M.O.12 were produced. On the side of the accused, no witness was
examined.
8. After a full trial, the Court acquitted the accused for the
offence punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 302, 506(ii) of IPC,
against which, these present Criminal Appeals has been filed by P.W.2
and the State on the following among other grounds:-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
a) They eye witnesses, P.W.1 who is the wife of the deceased
and P.W.2 who is the brother of the deceased have deposed about the
occurrence of a brutal murder. However, the IInd Additional District
Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi acquitted the accused without appreciating
and considering the real facts and circumstances.
b) That the P.W.1, categorically and candidly deposed about
the motive and previous enmity made between the accused and the
deceased. Per contra, the Court below acquitted the accused without
rebutting the motive ground. Hence, the acquittal judgment is liable to be
set aside at once.
c) That the P.W.3, who is the doctor clearly stated about the
26 multiple grievous injuries caused on the body of the deceased. Per
contra, the Court below simply acquitted the accused without disproving
the medical evidence of P.W.3.
d) As per the deposition of P.W.18, Investigation Officer
which reveals that the weapon namely a Knife was recovered from the
accused. Whereas, without citing any reason to disprove the evidence of
P.W.18, the trial Court acquitted the accused.
e) That the Trial Court failed to recognize the existence of
enmity between the accused Ramakrishnan and the deceased Selvaraj,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
which formed the motive for the accused to kill the deceased. The
deceased victim has filed a complaint against the accused and he was
arrested in Crime No.63/2013 and later released by the Court. This fact
explains the motive for the accused to assault the deceased victim.
f) That the confession given by the accused to the
Investigation Officer concerning the place where the murder weapon was
hidden and later the discovery of the same becomes relevant to prove the
guilt of the accused under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act,
irrespective of the question, whether it is a confession or not.
g) That the Court erred in not taking into account the fact
that the blood-stained cloths M.O.6 to 12, which the accused wore when
they were arrested matched the blood group of the deceased (AB Blood
Group). This corroborates the statements of P.W.3, Dr. Ramalakshmi that
the deceased blood would have splashed on the accused shirt when they
assaulted the deceased with the Knives M.O.1 and 2.
h) That the trial Court ought not to see that the evidence of
P.W.1 and P.W.2 along with the medical evidence by way of Ex.P5 and
Ex.P19.
9. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent argued
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
that P.W.1, and P.W.2, were not present at the time of occurrence. P.W.1
is the wife of the deceased and P.W.2 is the brother of the deceased are
planted witness. As per the eyewitnesses, P.W.1 and P.W.2, the victim
went to purchase pooja materials, while returning, the occurrence took
place. However, the Investigating Officer did not recover any such pooja
materials from the place of occurrence.
10. He further argued that as per P.W.1, the complaint was
written in her handwriting. The words Ramakrishnan son of Ramasamy
and Sethuraman were written by some other person. P.W.18 while
recording the statements of P.W.1, P.W.2, it was stated that A1 and the
juvenile were involved in the occurrence. On contrary, the above
witnesses stated before the Judicial Magistrate under Section 164
of Cr.P.C, stated that four persons were involved in the occurrence.
11. The motive against the deceased was not established by
the prosecution. P.W.1 was travelling along with the deceased. No blood
stain was found on her dresses, and the Investigating Officer did not
recover the two-wheeler in which the P.W.1 and the deceased were
travelling with blood stains from the place of occurrence. The ocular
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
evidence is not supported with medical evidence.
12. The confessions, arrest and recovery not properly
proved. The accused was arrested on 05.02.2015 and blood stained
dresses were recovered from A1, it is unbelievable that the accused
continuously worn the blood stained dresses after knowing that they were
searched by the police, and the Investigating Officer created such
document to unnecessarily include the accused against the crime.
13. The weapon was not shown to the victim for
identification. P.W.2 is a habitual offender. His brother, deceased also
resembled P.W.2, has been killed by the enemies of P.W.2 by mistaken
identity. The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond all reasonable
doubt, and the judgement of the trial Court is proper and no interference
required and prayed to dismiss the appeal by confirming the judgement
of the trial Court.
14. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the
materials available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
15. Now we have to decide whether the judgement of the
trial Court is perverse or arbitrarily liable to be set aside.
16. After careful perusal of the records, as per the
prosecution case, motive for the offence is that the deceased Selvaraj
filed a case against the accused, it was ended acquittal, both had enmity
against each other.
17. P.W.1 in her evidence states that the accused while
assaulting the deceased stated that he was acquitted on the case filed by
the deceased. However whenever the accused crossed the deceased, the
deceased was staring at him, and he should not live, took the knife and
stabbed him. P.W.1 admitted in her cross-examination that the case was
ended acquittal in the year 2013. From the year 2013 to 2015, there was
no problem between the accused and the deceased. Further it was not
established that prior to the occurrence, her husband quarrelled with the
accused in this regard. P.W.2 also did not state anything about the
previous quarrel between the accused and the deceased. Motive for the
occurrence was not properly established by the prosecution.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
18. Though several houses were situated near the place of
occurrence, only P.W.1, wife of the Deceased and the P.W.2, brother of
the deceased were cited as eyewitnesses to the occurrence.
19. P.W.1, in her evidence stated that on 04.12.2014, she
went along with her husband, to purchase pooja materials as he decided
to wear sacred Thulasi garland to go to Ayyappan Temple. At 7.00 hours,
she, her son Yoga Balan, the deceased travelled in splendor plus two-
wheeler. Her grandmother and brother-in-law came in another two-
wheeler. After the purchase of pooja materials, around 8:30 p.m., While
they were near Kamaraja Vilakku, Manthithope Road, the accused
Ramakrishanan and the juvenile Sethuraman intercepted their vehicle
and spoke to her husband. She stood 10 feet away. Her grandmother and
brother-in-law were following them. The accused Ramakrishnan then
took a knife hidden from his hip and stabbed her husband on the right
side of his neck, just above the chest repeatedly. While attacking, him the
accused stated that although he had been acquitted in the case filed by
the deceased, the deceased stared at him, whenever he crossed, he should
not remain alive. The juvenile also attacked, the deceased below his
stomach, and ribs, repeatedly. When her husband tried to prevent them,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
he had a fracture on his both hands wrist. When they raised hue and cry,
the accused threatened them by saying that, the same would happen to
them also and then they fled away from the place of occurrence. Her
husband succumbed to injuries. She went to Kovilpatti West Police
Station and gave complaint. Thereafter, police came to the occurrence
place and examined her. P.W.2 also supported her evidence.
20. Her statement was recorded under 164 of Cr.P.C by the
learned Judicial Magistrate on 06.02.2016. Before the Judicial
Magistrate, she stated that four persons attacked her husband. P.W.2 also
stated that his brother was attacked by four persons. The statements of
P.W.1 and P.W.2 were recorded two months after from the date of the
complaint. The eyewitnesses stated before the Magistrate that the
deceased was attacked by four persons but in the complaint, it was stated
that he was attacked by only two persons were attacked. During trial,
they were stated that two persons attacked. They further stated that
before the Magistrate, they mistakenly stated as four persons. If they had
truly witnessed the occurrence, they would have been able to provide the
exact details about the persons involved.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
21. Further P.W.1 in her cross-examination, admitted that she
left the pooja materials in the place of occurrence. The Investigating
Officer either in Ex.P6 observation or in the Ex.P18 rough sketch did not
mention anything about the pooja materials found in the place of
occurrence. She further admitted that after the attack, her husband
slumped off the bike with injuries. But no blood stain was found on the
bike.
22. P.W.2, deposed that while the deceased was travelling on
the bike, he was attacked by the accused. At that time P.W.1 also
travelling with the deceased. It was admitted that blood was oozing from
the deceased due to the injuries, there is possibility that blood splashed
on the clothes of P.W.1, however no blood stained dresses of the P.W.1
and the child, were recorded as she were seated on the rear side of the
bike, which create doubt about her presence at the place of occurrence.
As per the P.W.1 evidence, before attack there was a conversation
between the deceased and the accused, she was staying 10 feet away,
however, P.W.2 claims that the deceased was attacked while he was
travelling in the bike with P.W.1. It seems that there is discrepancy in the
testimony of P.W.1 and P.W.2 regarding the circumstances of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
deceased’s attack.
23. Furthermore the eye witness testimony does not
corroborate with the medical evidence. According to the medical
evidence around 25 injuries were found on the body of the deceased
which was not mentioned by the eye witnesses. The discrepancy between
the eye witness testimony and the medical evidence is a crucial issue.
The inconsistency potentially afford the credibility of the witness, which
raises the questions about the reliability of the eye witness.
24. One of the important eyewitnesses Tamilselvi, grand
mother of the P.W.1, who was also a witnessed the occurrence not
examined by the prosecution, for the reason best known.
25. The accused were arrested the next day on the
05.02.2015 at 10 am approximately 12 hours after the occurrence.
According to the prosecution version, the blood-stained clothes were
recovered from the accused and juvenile at time of arrest, which appears
highly improbable as one cannot reasonably expect the accused to have
continued, wearing the same clothes for such a long duration.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
26. P.W.16, witness cited for arrest, confession of the
accused and recovery. He did not support the prosecution case, he turned
hostile, and the arrest, confession and recovery was not proved by the
prosecution.
27. On careful perusal of the entire record, we conclude that
the prosecution failed to prove the offence against the accused beyond all
reasonable doubt and the benefit of the doubt was given to the accused,
by the trial Court after analyzing the materials on record, we do not find
any illegality or perversity in the judgement rendered by the trial Court.
28. Accordingly, these Criminal Appeals are dismissed and
the judgment passed in S.C.No.283 of 2017 on the file of the II
Additional District Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi District, dated
19.02.2021 is hereby confirmed.
(G.J., J.) & (R.P., J.)
29.04.2025
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
NCC : Yes / No
gvn/rm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
To
1.The IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Thoothukudi.
2.The The Inspector of Police,(Crime)
Kovilpatti West Police Station,
Thoothukudi District.
(in Cr.No.941 of 2015)
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
4.The Section Officer,
ER/VR Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
G.JAYACHANDRAN J.
AND
R.POORNIMA, J.
GVN/RM
Judgment in
Crl.A(MD)Nos.415 & 530 of 2021
29.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/04/2025 04:56:25 pm )
