Madras High Court
R.Elavarasan vs The State on 7 October, 2025
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.A.No.394 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 17.09.2025
PRONOUNCED ON : 07.10.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.A.No.394 of 2014 and
Crl.M.P.No.12877 of 2018
1.R.Elavarasan
2.E.Arumugam
3.S.Durairaj
4.R.Sengodi
5.M.Chakrapani
6.N.Selvam ... Appellants
Vs.
The State
Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Villupuram Sub Division,
Villupuram District.
[Crime No.77/2018 of Mailam Police Station]. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374 of Code of Criminal
Procedure, to set aside the judgment and sentence passed in S.C.No.192 of
2010 dated 23.06.2014 by the Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge),
Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Saikrishnan
Page No.1 of 21
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
Crl.A.No.394 of 2014
For Respondent : Mr.L.Baskaran,
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
For Defacto Complainant : Ms.J.Madhumitha,
Legal Aid Counsel
JUDGMENT
Challenging the impugned judgment dated 23.06.2014 in S.C.No.192 of
2010 passed by the learned Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge),
Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram (trial Court), this Criminal Appeal
is filed by the appellants/A1, A5, A7, A15, A18 & A21.
2.For convenience and clarity, the appellants are referred to as accused,
as per their rank, in the impugned judgment.
3.The conviction and sentence of the trial Court are as follows:
Rank of the Offence Conviction and Sentence
Accused
A1 For offence under ● Convicted and Sentenced to
Sections 148 & 323 IPC pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in
and Section 3(1)(x) of default, to undergo Simple
Scheduled Castes and Imprisonment for three months
Scheduled Tribes for offence under Section 148
(Prevention of Atrocities) IPC.
Act, 1989 r/w 149 IPC. ● Convicted and Sentenced to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
Rank of the Offence Conviction and Sentence
Accused
pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in
default, to undergo Simple
Imprisonment for three months
for offence under Section 323
IPC.
● Convicted and Sentenced to
undergo Rigorous
Imprisonment for six months
and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-,
in default, to undergo Rigorous
Imprisonment for two months
for offence under Section
3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 r/w 149 IPC.
A5, A7, For offence under ● Convicted and Sentenced to
A15, A18 & Sections 148 & 323 r/w pay a fine of Rs.500/- each, in
A21 149 of IPC. default, to undergo Simple
Imprisonment for three months
each for offence under Section
148 IPC.
● Convicted and Sentenced to
pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each,
in default, to undergo Simple
Imprisonment for three months
each for offence under Section
323 r/w 149 IPC.
A1, A3 to For offence under Section
A10, A14 to 147 IPC Found Not Guilty
A23, A25
and A26
A2 & A13 For offence under Section Found Not Guilty
148 IPC
A3, A4, A6, For offence under Section Found Not Guilty
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
Rank of the Offence Conviction and Sentence
Accused
A8 to A10, 323 IPC
A14, A16,
A17, A19 &
A20
A2 & A13 For offence under Section Found Not Guilty
324 IPC
A22, A23, For offence under Section Found Not Guilty
A25 & A26 427 IPC
A3 & A9 For offence under Section Found Not Guilty
427 r/w 149 IPC
A1 For offence under Section Found Not Guilty
506(ii) IPC
A2, A12 & Charges Abated Charges Abated
A13
4.Earlier, this appeal came to be dismissed by this Court vide judgment
dated 02.11.2018, against which, the appellants herein preferred an appeal
before the Hon'ble Apex Court in S.L.P(Crl.)No.2578 of 2020. The grievances
of the appellants therein was that this Court dismissed this appeal in the
absence of the appellants without hearing them or their counsel. In view of
above said submission and on perusal of the impugned judgment of this Court
dated 02.11.2018, the Hon'ble Apex Court found that the appeal was dismissed
in the absence of the appellants without hearing them or their counsel and the
appellants were not given opportunity to appear or to engage another counsel,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
not even the next date fixed was intimated to the appellants. In view of the
facts and circumstances, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the judgment passed
by this Court on 02.11.2018 cannot be sustained in law, hence, set aside the
judgment and the appeal is remitted back to the file of this Court for fresh
consideration.
5.This Court on 17.03.2025 had passed the following order:
“Pursuant to the orders passed by this Court on
03.03.2025, the respondent Police ensured the presence of
E.Arumugam/A5, S.Durairaj/A7, M.Chakrapani/A18 and
Selvam/A21. As far as R.Elavarasan/A1 and R.Sengodi/A15,
Mr.V.S.Gopu, learned counsel submits that he is representing A1
and A15 along with other accused.
2.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) produced
the notice served to the defacto complainant/Sathyanathan and a
letter given by the defacto complainant informing that he is
presently taking treatment at Mothercare Foundation, a De-
addiction Centre and he is unable to walk or undertake travel,
hence he requested the Court to appoint a legal aid counsel to
represent him.
3.In view of the same, this Court appoints
Ms.J.Madhumitha, Enrollment No.MS 2363/2017, Cell
No.9791711963 as Legal Aid Counsel on behalf of the defacto
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
complainant.
4.The Registry is directed to print the name of
Ms.J.Madhumitha as Legal Aid Counsel for the defacto
complainant in the cause-list.
5.The learned counsel for the appellant is directed to serve
copy of the appeal papers to the learned Legal Aid counsel
appearing for the respondent.”
6.After hearing the submissions of the appellants (A1, A5, A7, A15, A18
& A21) herein and learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the
respondent Police and the Legal Aid Counsel for the defacto
complainant/victim, the following judgment is passed by this Court.
7.Gist of the case is that during the weekend on 11.02.2006 at about
05.30 p.m., PW2 went to his brother Doss's house along with his wife/PW3 to
see the construction of the house, at that time, A1 driving a tractor bearing
Registration No.TN-32-Y-6135 with trailer came in a rash and negligent
manner and ran over the right foot of PW3, wife of PW2. Not stopping with
that, A1 stopped the tractor, got down, abused PW2, PW3 and others calling
them by their caste name and asked how dare colony people can question him,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
and further abused and threatened them in public that he would bring his
people from the village to teach them a lesson. Soon around 30 persons armed
with cricket bats, sticks, wooden logs, and knife entered the colony and started
attacking PW2, PW3, and others who intervened. Further, as a mob, they
began rioting running into the entire colony, attacking whoever was cited,
damaged tiled roofs, vessels, two-wheelers, and whatever else they came
across, disconnected the telephone wires and cable wires. This attack was for
15 minutes, thereafter, warning the colony people, all the accused left the
place. Due the attack, several colony people got injured. Later, the attack
informed to Mailam Police Station by mobile phone, and ambulance took the
injured to Government Hospital, Tindivanam where the Casualty
Doctors/PW20 & PW21 gave first aid treatment and also admitted some of the
injured in the hospital.
8.Mr.Michael Durairaj, Sub Inspector of Police, Mailam Police Station
received the information from the hospital, visited the hospital, received the
complaint (Ex.P1) from PW2, registered FIR (Ex.P19) in Crime No.77 of 2006
for offence under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324 & 307 IPC and Section 3(1) of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 and
Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 on 11.02.2006 at 23.50 hours. The Superintendent of
Police, Villupuram nominated the Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Villupuram as Investigating Officer in this case. Thereafter, PW22 took over
investigation, visited the scene of occurrence, prepared Observation Mahazar,
Rough Sketch (Exs.P20 & P21) in the presence of witnesses, collected
materials available in the scene of occurrence, visited hospital, enquired
injured, recorded their statements, arrested accused, on their confession,
material objects (MO1 to MO9) seized, community certificates of the victim
and accused collected. After collection of medical records (Exs.P3 to P18) and
other materials, PW22 filed charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate No.II,
Tindivanam and P.R.C.No.1 of 2007 assigned. On committal, the case
transferred to the file of the trial Court.
9.During trial, on the side of the prosecution, 22 witnesses examined as
PW1 to PW22 and 30 documents marked as Exs.P1 to P30 and MO1 to MO9
produced. On the side of the defence, no witness examined and no document
marked. On conclusion of trial, the trial Court convicted the appellants as
stated above.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
10.The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that A1 is the son of
A13/Rajendran, Panchayat President and there was dispute between the colony
people and villagers with regard to right of worship of Kaliamman Temple and
a consecration ceremony held during the relevant point of time. The Tahsildar
conducted a peace meeting and found colony people had no right, thereafter,
colony people held protests, agitations and road roko. The Police used force to
disperse the agitators, due to which, colony people got injured, which is now
being projected against the appellants.
11.The learned counsel further submitted that there were two incidents
projected against the accused herein. One is with regard to A1 driving the
tractor in a rash and negligent manner and running over PW3's right foot,
thereafter, A1 stopped the tractor, abused PW2, PW3 and others using their
caste name. The second incident is that A1 went back to the village, brought
around 30 persons armed with deadly weapons, formed a mob, attacked the
colony people and damaged the tiled roofs, vessels, two wheelers and
whatever else they came across. For the first incident, it is stated that PW1,
PW2 & PW3 were present at the time of incident. PW1 is the friend of PW2
and PW2 is the husband of PW3. PW1 states that since the tractor of A1 came
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
in a rash and negligent manner, PW3 had to move fast, due to which, she
sustained sprain, thereafter, wordy quarrel arose, at that time, A1 used abusive
words. PW2's version is that the tyre of the tractor ran over PW3's foot.
PW3's version is that the tractor dashed against her and she fell down and
sustained injuries. Thus, running over on PW3's foot is an exaggeration.
Further, the case is that PW2 and PW3 came to see PW2's brother Doss and his
new construction of house, but the said Doss not examined as witness. PW6,
wife of Doss, version is that PW3 cried with pain stating that tyre of the tractor
ran over her foot. But PW3's version is otherwise. In this case, PW1, PW2 &
PW3 spoke about both first and second incidents. PW4, PW5, PW6, PW7,
PW8, PW9, PW10, PW11, PW13, PW14, PW15, PW16, PW17, PW18 &
PW19 are all witnesses from the colony, out of whom, PW4, PW5, PW6,
PW8, PW9, PW10, PW11, PW13, PW14, PW15, PW16, PW18 & PW19
spoke about second incident of rioting, of them, PW18 & PW19 state A1 was
driving a tipper lorry. PW9, PW10 & PW16 not supported the case of the
prosecution, turned hostile. All the colony witnesses claimed that they were
injured and took treatment. The Doctors/PW20 & PW21 treated the injured
records simple injury. Though these witnesses claimed that they were
attacked, but they were unable to identify the accused by name. The
Doctors/PW20 & PW21 issued Accident Registers and Wound Certificates
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
(Exs.P3 to P18) stating that the injured started coming to the hospital from
09.30 p.m onwards throughout the night, but the incident took place at about
05.00 p.m. Why four hours delay to reach the hospital, no explanation given
and the complaint (Ex.P1) is almost five hours after the alleged attack. This
shows a false case is concocted against the accused for the temple dispute,
hence, the entire colony people ganged up together and falsely implicated the
appellants.
12.The learned counsel further submitted that the Investigating
Officer/PW22 admits that colony people made a representation to the District
Collector, thereafter, higher officials intervened, action was taken and the
crowd got dispersed. This would go to show that no independent investigation
conducted and the case is due to the pressure exerted by a group of people
from colony. To pacify colony people and to ease out the tension, the
prosecution implicated around 30 villagers as accused in this case. Though the
trial Court during trial charged 26 persons, out of which three persons died,
two found absconding, case split up, 15 acquitted and six alone convicted. The
entire case proceeded as though a mob had gathered, rioting took place. When
the trial Court disbelieved the case against 15 accused and acquitted them, the
same benefit ought to have extended to the appellants and they ought to have
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
acquitted, hence, the impugned judgment of the trial Court is not sustainable.
13.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the
respondent Police filed counter and submitted that PW21 who was authorized
and nominated as Investigating Officer, received FIR (Ex.P19) from
Mr.Michael Durairaj, Sub Inspector of Police, Mailam Police Station, took up
investigation, visited scene of occurrence, prepared Observation Mahazar,
Rough Sketch (Exs.P20 & P21), enquired the witnesses, recorded their
statements, arrested the accused, on their confession, recovered material
objects (MO1 to MO9). In this case, 16 persons got injured. PW20 &
PW21/Casualty Doctors treated the injured and issued Accident Registers
(Exs.P3 to P10) and Wound Certificates (Exs.P11 to P18). The eye witnesses
for first incident are PW1 & PW2. The injured witnesses are PW1, PW2,
PW3, PW4, PW5, PW7, PW8, PW9, PW10, PW11, PW13, PW14, PW15,
PW17 & PW18. All these witnesses including other villagers deposed about
the damage caused to the property of the colony people by the accused. He
further submitted that the witnesses are rustic villagers with little or no
education and it was a mob that was attacked the colony people. Though they
could not put a name to the accused persons, but they identified the accused
standing in the dock as the persons who attacked them. Though an attempt
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
was made to show there was temple dispute and the accused falsely
implicated, the same cannot be accepted since the temple dispute was much
before the attack, hence, nothing to do with the incident happened on
11.02.2006.
14.It is further submitted that on 11.02.2006, A1, son of A13/Rajendran,
Panchayat President was illegally mining river sand and transporting the same,
for that reason, A1 drove the tractor in a rash and negligent manner with high
speed and ran over right foot of PW3. When PW1 & PW2 questioned A1, he
got infuriated. A1 who belongs to higher caste, abused the colony people
calling their caste name. Thereafter, A1 came with 30 persons armed with
deadly weapons in a tractor, attacked the colony people and damaged their
properties. The rioting, damages and injuries sustained clearly spoken by the
witnesses. The trial Court on careful analysis of evidence and materials
acquitted some of the accused and convicted the appellants, against whom,
specific overtact proved.
15.He further submitted that the three witnesses turned hostile is only
with regard to non mentioning of names but they clearly spoken about rioting
and injuries sustained. PW12/Tahsildar gave community certificate (Ex.P2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
confirming the victims belong to Scheduled Caste community and the accused
belong to Intermediate community. The trial Court on the evidence and
materials produced, rightly convicted the appellants, hence, prayed for
dismissal of the appeal.
16.The Legal Aid Counsel for the defacto complainant/victim submitted
that in this case, the defacto complainant is none other than a School Teacher
and the injured/PW3 in the first incident is a School Headmistress. PW2 &
PW3 were residing in Tindivanam town. Doss, brother of PW2 was residing
in Chinnanerkunam village colony. During the weekend on 11.02.2006, PW2
& PW3 had come to visit Doss, who was constructing a house. A1, son of
A13/Panchayat President, who was illegally transporting river sand in the
tractor, was driving the tractor in a rash and negligent manner at high speed
into the colony, causing danger to the lives of people there, and ran over PW3's
right foot. PW1 & PW2 questioned A1, but A1 shown no remorse, instead, he
abused and threatened PW1, PW2, PW3, and their family members and
relatives who were standing there, calling them by their caste names. Not
stopping with that, A1 went to the village, brought around 30 persons armed
with deadly weapons like cricket bats, knives, sticks, and wooden logs, and
attacked PW2, PW3, and all who came across for the only reason they all
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
belong to Scheduled Caste community colony people. Further, the accused
damaged properties and valuables. As a result, around 18 people got injured
went to the Government Hospital, Tindivanam, from there, information sent to
Mailam Police Station. Mr.Michael Durairaj, Sub Inspector of Police received
the information, visited the hospital, received the complaint (Ex.P1) from
PW2, registered FIR (Ex.P19). Thereafter, PW22 took up investigation,
arrested the accused, seized material objects (MO1 to MO9), collected the
community certificate (Ex.P2), medical records (Exs.P3 to P18) and filed
charge sheet before the trial Court. In this case, Doss, brother of PW2 could
not be examined as witness since he was serving in Army. The raise and
development of the colony people became an eye soar and jealously to the
village people, who for no reason formed a mob, attacked colony people and
now take a defence that there was dispute over temple rights, which is nothing
but an imaginary story for defence. Had the temple dispute is real and actually
happened, definitely some question would have been put to PW12/Tahsildar.
In this case, PW12 not even cross examined and no suggestions put to him in
this regard. In view of the above, the impugned judgment of the trial Court not
to be interfered with.
17.This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
materials available on record.
18.In this case, PW2 is the defacto complainant and PW3 is his wife.
Both PW2 and PW3 are Teachers and PW2's brother Doss was an Army man.
PW1 is the cousin brother of PW2 and one Ezhumalai is the Uncle.
Mr.Michael Durairaj, Sub Inspector of Police, Mailam Police Station received
information from the Government Hospital, Tindivanam, visited the hospital,
received the complaint (Ex.P1) from PW2 who was taking treatment. From
the complaint (Ex.P1), it is seen that on 11.02.2006, PW2 and his wife/PW3
had gone to see Doss who was constructing a house. When they were near the
on-going construction house, at about 05.30 p.m. A1 came driving the tractor
with trailer bearing Registration No.TN-32-Y-6135 in a rash and negligent
manner loaded with river sand and ran over PW3's right foot. When PW1 &
PW2 questioned A1, he stopped the tractor, came down, abused, threatened
and questioned them why they were standing on the road. A1 also abused
them by calling their caste name and claimed that he would bring others from
the village and teach them a lesson. Said so, A1 had gone and brought around
30 persons in his tractor armed with cricket bats, knife, wooden logs, sticks
and started attacking indiscriminately all in the colony whoever was seen
without any reason and caused injuries to them and damage to the properties.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
Attacking colony people without any reason confirms nothing but communal
hatred.
19.The first incident of rash and negligent driving of tractor by A1 and
causing injuries to PW3 are spoken by PW1, PW2 and PW3. PW2's brother
Doss not examined since he was serving in Army. PW4 to PW11 and PW13 to
PW19 are all colony people who sustained injuries and witnessed the damage
caused to the properties, took treatment at Government Hospital, Tindivanam.
PW20 and PW21/Casualty Doctors treated the injured persons, issued
Accident Registers and Wound Certificates (Exs.P3 to P18). All the injured
rushed to the hospital on the same day of occurrence without any delay. The
proximity of the incident, injuries sustained and treatment taken in the hospital
confirms no exaggeration or implication in this case.
20.In this case, after the incident, the situation at the scene of occurrence
got ignited and surcharged, hence, the District Collector and other higher
officials had to intervene to give undertaking and confidence to the injured
persons that their life and property will be safeguarded, thereafter normalcy
restored. PW22/Investigating Officer narrated the sequence of investigation,
collection of materials confirming the role played by each of the accused, and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
their specific overtact and filing of final report. The trial Court considering the
evidence of injured witnesses and documents giving benefit of doubt, acquitted
some of the accused.
21.The trial Court on the evidence of eye witnesses and injured
witnesses PW1, PW2, PW3, PW4, PW5, PW7, PW8, PW9, PW10, PW11,
PW13, PW14, PW15, PW16, PW17 & PW18 who all present in the scene of
occurrence at the time of rioting and arson committed by the appellants
coupled with the medical records, the evidence of Doctors/PW20 & PW21,
Tahsildar/PW12, arrest and recovery of material objects/MO1 to MO9 all
proved, had rightly convicted the appellants (A1, A5, A7, A15, A18 & A21) in
this case. This Court finds the impugned judgment of the trial Court is correct
and proper and no reason to interfere.
22.In the result, this Criminal Appeal stands dismissed confirming the
impugned judgment dated 23.06.2014 in S.C.No.192 of 2010 passed by the
learned Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge), Villupuram Sessions
Division, Villupuram.
23.The trial Court is directed to issue conviction warrant without any
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
delay and the respondent Police to secure A1 to undergo rest of the sentence.
24.This Court places its appreciation to the Legal Aid Counsel for
thorough preparation and strenuous arguments putting forth the case of the
defacto complainant/victim. The Legal Services Authority, Madras High Court
is directed to pay the entitled remuneration to the learned counsel
Ms.J.Madhumitha. Connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
07.10.2025
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
vv2
To
1.The Sessions Judge (Principal Sessions Judge),
Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram.
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Villupuram Sub Division,
Villupuram District.
3.The Legal Services Authority,
Madras High Court.
4.The Central Prison,
Cuddalore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
5.The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
vv2
PRE-DELIVERY JUDGMENT IN
07.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/10/2025 11:28:12 am )
