Madras High Court
Rajavel vs State Represented By on 13 July, 2023
Author: Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
Bench: Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
Crl.R.C.No.358 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.07.2023
CORAM:
The Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Crl.R.C.No.358 of 2018
Rajavel ...Petitioner
-Vs-
State represented by
Inspector of Police,
Gurubarapalli Police Station,
Krishnagiri District.
(Crime No.171 of 2015) ...Respondent
Prayer:- Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 read with 401 of
Cr.P.C, to set aside the order passed by the Principal Session Judge,
Krishnagiri, in Crl.Appeal.No.38 of 2017 dated 25.01.2018 confirming the
order of Conviction dated 17.07.2017 passed by the Judicial Magistrate
No.II, Krishnagiri in C.C.No.149 of 2015.
For Petitioner : No appearance
For Respondent : M/s.V.Meganathan,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
When the case came up for hearing today, there is no representation on behalf of the Revision Petitioner. Earlier on 06.07.2023, when the case came up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/6 Crl.R.C.No.358 of 2018 the Revision Petitioner. On perusal of records, it was found that the case was already dismissed for non prosecution by this Court on 18.10.2022. Subsequently, on filing Crl.M.P.No.5017 of 2023, as per order dated 11.04.2023, Crl.R.C.No.358 of 2018 had been restored. Even though, the case was in the list, the Revision Petitioner was not ready and the Respondent Police was present in Court.
2. Today, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that the Inspector of Police, Gurubarapalli Police Station, on verification of the records from the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate II, Krishnagiri would submit that the Accused is complying the order of this Court in the Crl.M.P.No.4399 of 2018 in Crl.R.C.No.358 of 2018 by appearing before the learned Judicial Magistrate II, Krishnagiri, on every first working day of the month and lastly the accused appeared on 01.07.2023. The Accused was convicted for offences under Section 279 IPC to undergo One month Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs.500/- in default two weeks Simple Imprisonment and for offence under Section 337 IPC, to undergo One month Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs.500/- in default two weeks Simple Imprisonment, for the offence under Section 338 IPC, to undergo https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/6 Crl.R.C.No.358 of 2018 Three months Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs.500/- in default two weeks Simple Imprisonment, for the offence under Section 304(A) IPC, to undergo One year Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,500/- in default One month Simple Imprisonment. The Accused who had suffered judgment of conviction, sentence of imprisonment and fine had preferred Appeal before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri in Crl.A.No.38 of 2017. By judgment dated 25.01.2018, the judgment of conviction recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri was confirmed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri. Aggrieved by the same, the Revision Petitioner/Accused had preferred this Criminal Revision Case.
3. At the stage of admission of Criminal Revision Case No.358 of 2018, the Accused who was convicted by the Trial Court and confirmed by the Appellate Court, was granted bail in Crl.M.P.No.4399 of 2018 to the Accused/ Revision Petitioner and directed him to appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court II, at Krishnagiri, on the first working day of every English Calendar month at 10.30 a.m., for a period for six months. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/6 Crl.R.C.No.358 of 2018
4. From the report of the Inspector of Police, Gurubarapalli Police Station, Krishnagiri District, it is found that Accused is complying the conditions imposed on him, while granting the bail.
5. Having suffered conviction before the Trial Court and confirmed by the Appellate Court, the Revision Petitioner herein is aware of the out come of the Criminal Revision Case. That is why, he is not co-operating with the Court for disposal of the Criminal Revision Case. As per the reported ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560], when the Court grants bail to the Accused, it has to insist for the co-operation of the Accused both at the time of investigation as well as disposal of the case. Here having suffered conviction before the Trial Court and confirmed by the First Appellate Court, the Accused is not co-operating for the disposal of the Criminal Revision Case, filed in the year 2018. Even after five years, he is not ready to co-operate for disposal of the case. Already this Criminal Revision Case, was dismissed on 18.10.2022. Subsequently, as per the order in Crl.M.P.No.5017 of 2023, dated 11.04.2023, it was restored to file. Even after restoration of the case, there is no representation on behalf of the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/6 Crl.R.C.No.358 of 2018 Revision Petitioner, which shows the lack of respect and lack of bonafide on the part of the Revision Petitioner who had suffered judgment of conviction before the Trial Court and confirmed by the First Appellate Court. Therefore, no indulgence is required for the Litigant of this character. Hence, Criminal Revision Case is dismissed for the second time for non prosecution of the case. The Inspector of Police, Gurubarapalli Police Station, who is present in the Court is directed to obtain warrant of arrest from the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate II, Krishnagiri. The learned Judicial Magistrate II, Krishnagiri, is directed to issue warrant in continuation of judgment of conviction recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate in C.C.No.149 of 2015 and confine him to Prison to undergo imprisonment which was confirmed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri and report compliance of this order by return of E.Mail.
13.07.2023 jai Note: Issue order copy on 13.07.2023 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6 Crl.R.C.No.358 of 2018 SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J., jai To
1.The learned Principal Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri.
2.The learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Krishnagiri.
3. The Government Advocate, Government Advocate, Criminal Side, High Court of Madras.
Crl.R.C.No.358 of 2018
13.07.2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6