Madras High Court
R.Elavarasan vs The State on 2 November, 2018
Author: P.Velmurugan
Bench: P.Velmurugan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Date: 02.11.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Criminal Appeal No.394 of 2014
1.R.Elavarasan .. Appellant/A1
2.E.Arumugam .. Appellant/A5
3.S.Durairaj .. Appellant/A7
4.R.Sengodi .. Appellant/A15
5.M.Chakrapani .. Appellant/A18
6.Selvam .. Appellant/A21
Vs
The State
Represented by
The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Villupuram Sub Division,
Villupuram District.
(Crime No.77/2006 of
Mailam Police Station) .. Respondent
Prayer:- Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C., to set
aside the judgment and sentence passed in S.C.No.192 of 2010 dated
23.06.2014 by the learned Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge),
Villupuram.
For Appellant : No Appearance
For Respondent : Mr. R.Ravichandran
Govt. Advocate (Crl.side)
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
JUDGMENT
The accused/A1, A5, A7, A15, A18 and A21 in S.C.No.192 of 2010 on the file of the Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge), Villupuram are the appellants herein.
2.(i)Totally, there are twenty six accused/A1 to A26. The appellants herein are 1st, 5th, 7th, 15th 18th and 21st accused. A1 stood charged for the offence under Sections 147 and 506(ii) IPC and also for the offence under Section 3(1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989 r/w 149 IPC. A15 stood charged for the offence under Section 147 IPC. A7, A18 and A21 stood charged for the offence under Section 323 IPC. When they were questioned as to the charges, they pleaded not guilty and therefore, they were put on trial.
(ii)The learned Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge), Villupuram, after full-fledged trial, found
(a)A1 guilty for the offence under Sections 148 and 323 IPC and 3(1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989 r/w 149 IPC and
(b)A5, A7, A15, A18 and A21 guilty for the offence under Sections 148 and 323 r/w 149 IPC and
(c)convicted A1 for the offence under Sections 148 and 323 IPC and 3(1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989 r/w 149 IPC and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default, to undergo simple http://www.judis.nic.in 3 imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 148 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 323 IPC and 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 the offence under Section 3(1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989 r/w 149 of IPC and
(d)convicted A5, A7, A15, A18 and A21 for the offence under Sections 148 and 323 r/w 149 IPC and sentenced them to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each for the offence under Section 148 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each for the offence under Section 323 r/w 149 IPC. //(iii)Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants/ A1, A5, A7, A15, A18 and A21 are before this Court with this Criminal Appeal.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:-
(i)On 11.02.2006, at around 5.30 p.m, one Sathiyanathan of Chinna Nerukunam Village Colony had gone to his brother's house and when returning to his house, 1st accused, who had driven a tractor with trailer bearing Registration No.T.N.32-Y-6135 in a rash and negligent manner, ran over right foot of Suhirdha, namely wife of http://www.judis.nic.in 4 Sathiyanathan. When P.W.1 and P.W.2 and others supporting Suhirda P.W.3, 1st accused abused them in filthy language.
Following the said incident, 1st accused called his friends and relatives and formed a group and they had formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with dangerous weapons as a rioting group, 1st accused assaulted witness Ulaganayaki with cricket bat on her right cheek and lips, thereby caused simple injury, 3rd accused assaulted the said witness with stick thereby caused simple injury, 4th accused assaulted witness Gopal on his left shoulder with stick thereby caused simple injury, 5th accused assaulted witness Poongodi with stick on her right arm thereby caused simple injury, 6th accused assaulted witness Roselin @ Rajeswari with stick on fore arm thereby caused simple injury, 7th accused assaulted witness Hariraman with stick on his left eye bow, thereby caused simple injury, 8th accused assaulted witness Moorthy with stick on his nose and left hand, 9th accused assaulted the same witness Moorthy thereby, caused simple injury, 10th accused assaulted witness Shenbagavalli with stick on her left knee thereby, caused simple injury and 14th and 15th accused assaulted witness Sankar and witness Vijayan respectively with bricks on their right leg, thereby caused simple injury and 16th accused assaulted witness Veerammal on her right arm with stick, 17th accused assaulted witness Govindhammal with stick on her arm, 18th accused assaulted witness Iyyappadoss with stick on his right chest, http://www.judis.nic.in 5 19th accused assaulted witness Prabu with stick on his left side back, 20th accused assaulted witness Prabu on his left shoulder, 21st accused assaulted witness Poongodi with stick on her left parietal region thereby caused simple injury and in the same occurrence and during the course of same transaction, 2nd accused assaulted witness Gopal on his head with sickle thereby caused simple injury, 13th accused assaulted witness Sathyanathan with sickle on his left eye brow thereby caused simple injuries and in the same occurrence and during the course of same transaction accused 22, 23, 25 and 26 indulged in vandalism, 22nd accused smashed the tiles of the house of witness Dhamodharan, 23rd accused smashed the tiles of house witness Perumal with stick, 26th accused smashed the roof, tiles of house of witness Muniyan @ Munusamy with stick and thereby each accused caused damage to the extent of Rs.5,000/- each and in the same occurrence and during the course of same transaction accused 3 and 9 were the members of the unlawful assembly and in the same occurrence and during the course of same transaction, 1st accused criminally intimidated the witness Sathyanathan and in the same occurrence and during the course of same transaction, 1st accused abused the witnesses in filthy language referring to their caste name and accordingly, The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Villupuram Sub Division filed a final report before the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Tindivanam against all the aforesaid accused for the offence under http://www.judis.nic.in 6 Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 427 r/w 149, 506(ii) of IPC & 3 (1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.
(ii)On receipt of charge sheet, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Tindivanam took cognizance of the case on file in P.R.C.No.1 of 2007 and after complying with the provision of Section 207 of Cr.P.C, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Tindivanam came to the conclusion that the offence alleged under Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST(POA) Act 1989 was exclusively triable by the Special Judge, namely, Principal Sessions Judge, Villupuram, he committed the case to this Court under Section 209(A) of Cr.P.C.
(iii)11th accused Loganathan and 24th accused Murali did not appear before the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Tindivanam, the case against them was split up and the same has been taken on file in P.R.C.No.19 of 2008. The 2nd accused Elumalai, 12th accused Ulaganathan and 13th accused Rajendiran died during the pendency of the case.
(iv)On appearance of the said accused, on perusal of records and on hearing the arguments of both sides, the Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge), Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram found the prima facie evidence available in the case records, framed charges http://www.judis.nic.in 7 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 427 r/w 149 and 506(ii) IPC and 3 (1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989 against the accused, read over and explained to them.
(v)Based on the above materials, the learned Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge), Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram, after following the procedures, framed the charges under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 427 r/w 149 and 506(ii) IPC and 3 (1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989 against the accused, read over and explained to them. When they were questioned as to the charges, all the accused have pleaded not guilty and therefore, they were put on trial.
(vi)Before the learned Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge), Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram, in order to prove the case of the prosecution, on the side of the prosecution, as many as 22 witnesses were examined as P.W.1 to P.W.22 and 30 documents were marked as Exs.P.1 to P.30. No Material Object was exhibited. On the side of the accused, no witness was examined and no document was marked.
4.(i)Out of the witnesses examined, P.W.1, Sankar stated that he belongs to Hindu, Adi-Dravidar community and he knew Sathyanathan and he was present at the time of occurrence. Six http://www.judis.nic.in 8 years ago, at around 4.00 p.m, when 1st accused Elavarasan was driving tractor in a rash and negligent manner, P.W.1 Sankar and others were standing near the house of brother of Sankar and when the wife of Sathyanathan moved fastly, 1st accused ran over the tractor on her right foot and eventually she developed cramp in her legs and he and others physically supported wife of Sathyanathan and on seeing the same, 1st accused abused P.W.1 and others in filthy language making reference to their caste and immediately after the said occurrence a group consisting of 30 members came there and assaulted Sathyanathan with brick on his head and 1st accused, Elavarasan, who made such assault and other accused persons were also holding stick and wooden stick and the family members of 1st accused assaulted P.W.1 and eventually he fainted and he was not able to identify as to who were the persons assaulted him and thereafter, the Government Officials came to the spot and P.W.1 was taken to hospital for treatment. Sathianathan gave complaint to the police.
(ii)P.W.2, has stated in his evidence that on 11.02.2006, P.W.1 and others were just standing near the house of his brother, who was constructing a building and at that time, 1st accused had driven a tractor with trailer in a rash and negligent manner and the wheels of the tractor ran over the foot of Sathyanathan's wife and eventually http://www.judis.nic.in 9 she sustained injury and 1st accused shouted at P.W.1 and others and further abused them in filthy language making reference to their caste and following the said incident not less than 20 to 30 people had come with sticks, iron pipe and brick and accused Rajendiran assaulted on his head with brick and other accused persons in the group assaulted other persons. The complaint given by P.W.1 has been marked as Ex.P1.
(iii)P.W.3, has spoken in her evidence that 1st accused had driven the tractor in a rash and negligent manner and the tractor ran over her feet and 1st accused making reference of the caste of P.W.1 to P.W.3 and she further stated that immediately after the said occurrence, about 20 persons came with knife, sticks and bricks and at that time Rajendiran/A3 assaulted P.W.2 with knife on his head and Sankar, Poongodi, Loganayagi, Gopal and Hari were assaulted by group of persons and she is not in a position to identify the accused persons.
(iv)P.W.4, Gopal has stated in his evidence that on 06.11.2006, he heard the noise at around 5.30 p.m and he came out of his house and saw 30 persons holding bat, knife and sticks in their hands and he pacified the accused persons and the accused Durai assaulted him http://www.judis.nic.in 10 with stick and he fell unconscious and he woke up only in the hospital.
(v)P.W.5 Poongodi has stated in her evidence that 7 years ago, at around 5.30 p.m, she heard the noise outside her house and saw a group of persons holding knife, stick and brick and Arumugam and Selvam assaulted her and eventually she fell down and she was admitted in the hospital.
(vi)P.W.6 Roselin @ Rajeswari, who is none other than the brother's wife of P.W.2 has stated that on 11.02.2006, at around 5.30 p.m one young boy had driven a tractor in a rash and negligent manner and ran over the foot of her sister and when the conduct of that young boy was questioned, he abused the prosecution witnesses in filthy language making reference to their caste and a group of persons assaulted P.W.2 Sathyanathan on his head and her husband was also assaulted by a group of persons.
(vii)P.W.7 Hariharan has stated in his evidence that at the time of occurrence, one Elavarasan had driven the tractor with trailor in a rash and negligent manner and the tractor ran over the foot of P.W.2's wife and he abused the prosecution witnesses making reference to their caste and immediately following the said http://www.judis.nic.in 11 occurrence, a group of persons assembled in the place of occurrence with knife, bat, stone and sticks and accused Durai assaulted just above the right side eyebrow with stick and all the accused persons assaulted them.
(viii)P.W.8, Ulaganayaki has stated in her evidence that one Elumalai assaulted her with knife and eventually she sustained injury and she was taken to Government Hospital by Ambulance and the entire occurrence took place only because of the person, who drove the tractor in a rash and negligent manner.
(ix)P.W.9 has stated in his evidence that on coming to know that there was some problem near the house of one Doss, he went to the said place and a group of persons were assaulting with cricket bat and one Balu assaulted him with cricket bat on his left arm and left leg thereby, he sustained injury.
(x)P.W.10 Shenbagavalli turned hostile and not supported the case of prosecution.
(xi)P.W.11 Vijayan has spoken about the overtact of the accused Sengodi that she assaulted him with brick on his right armpit and he was taken to hospital and also stated that the tractor driven by 1st http://www.judis.nic.in 12 accused Elavarasan in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against P.W.2's wife.
(xii)P.W.12, a retired Tahsildar has stated that he issued a community certificate to the prosecution witnesses 4 to 6 and accused 1 to 26 stating that the prosecution witnesses belonged to Hindu Adi-dravidar community and A1 belonged to Hindu Naidu community and the other accused persons belonged to Hindu Vanniyar community.
(xiii)P.W.13 Veerammal has stated that the accused Durai assaulted her in the melee and assaulted with cricket bat on her right shoulder and eventually she fell down and she was taken to Government Hospital, Tindivanam.
(xiv)P.W.14 Govindammal has stated in her evidence that only because of the rash and negligent driving of tractor, 1st accused had caused flutter and eventually the accused persons came in a mob and accused Durai assaulted her with stick on right shoulder and she was taken to hospital.
(xv)P.W.15 Iyyappadoss has spoken about the alleged occurrence that the accused Rajendiran intimidated other accused http://www.judis.nic.in 13 persons by referring to their caste of the colony people and assaulted P.W.1 with knife just below his left side eye and one Chakrapani assaulted P.W.15 with stick on his chest and eventually he was taken to hospital for treatment. He further stated that the accused Elavarasan had driven the tractor with trailer in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against P.W.2's wife Suhirdha and eventually there was a wordy quarrel and only as sequel the occurrence took place.
(xvi)P.W.16 Dhamodharan has spoken about the atrocities said to have been committed by the persons, who came in a mob around 5.00 or 6.00 p.m, some 7 years ago and the accused were numbering about 25 persons and there was a quarrel near the house of Sathyanathan and nobody assaulted him and the people who came in a mob had smashed the roof tiles and household articles.
(xvii)P.W.17 Jagadeesan, has spoken about the alleged atrocities said to have been committed by the accused persons and he further stated that 1st accused Elavarasan, who drove the tractor in a rash and negligent manner and caused injury on the right foot of P.W.2's wife Suhirdha and thereafter, the accused persons, who came in a mob indulged in vandalism and caused damage to the house to an extent of Rs.5,000/-.
http://www.judis.nic.in (xviii)P.W.18 Susila stated that one of the accused persons had 14 driven the tractor in a rash and negligent manner and ran over P.W.2's wife Suhirdha and she sustained injury in her right foot and P.W.18 also sustained injury in her left elbow and there was bleeding and she was not able to identify the persons, who assaulted her and also such persons, who indulged in atrocities.
(xix)P.W.19 Muniyan @ Munusamy has spoken about the information received by him that P.W.2's wife Suhirdha had sustained injury on her right leg due to the rash and negligent driving of a tractor by son of one Rajendiran and subsequently, a big mob entered into the colony and indulged in vandalism and caused damage to the roof tiles and household articles.
(xx)P.W.20, who is the Doctor working in Government Hospital, Tindivanam has stated that on 13.2.2006 he has given treatment to Loganayaki at about 9.30 p.m, Kalvarayan at about 11.15 p.m, Rajeswari at about 11.20 p.m., Poongodi at about 11.26 p.m, Hariraman at about 11.30 p.m, Murthy at about 11.35 p.m, Jeyamoorthy at about 11.40 p.m and Shenbagavalli at about 1.24.p.m and he issued accident registers.
(xxi)P.W.21, who is the Doctor working in Government Hospital, Tindivanam has stated that on 12.02.2006, he has given treatment to Veerammal at around 10.15 a.m, Govindhammal at around http://www.judis.nic.in 15 10.30a.m, Sankar at 10.35 a.m and on 11.02.2006, he has given treatment to Iyyappadoss at around 10.50 a.m. and Gopal at around 11.15 p.m and the accident registers were also issued by him.
(xxii)P.W.22, Gunasekaran, Villupuram, who formerly served as Villupuram Sub-Divisional Deputy Superintendent of Police, has stated that he received F.I.R in Mailam Police Station in Cr.No.77 of 2006 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324 and 307 IPC and 3 of T.N.P.P.D.Act and 3 (1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989. On receipt of the same, P.W.22 went to the place of occurrence and inspected the same and prepared observation mahazar Ex.P.20 and Rough Sketch Ex.P.21 in the presence of witnesses. He examined the witnesses and recorded their statements. He recovered M.O.1 to M.O.9 in the presence of witnesses under Seizure mahazars Ex.P.22 to P.30. He arrested accused persons and sent them to judicial custody and he also examined the Tahsildar and recorded his statement and obtained community certificate. After completion of investigation, he laid the charge sheet against the accused persons under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324 and 427 r/w 149 IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.
5.When, the above incriminating materials were put to the http://www.judis.nic.in 16 accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., they denied the same as false. However, they did not choose to examine any witnesses nor did they mark any documents on their side.
6.After considering the oral and documentary evidence, the learned Special Judge, (Principal Sessions Judge), Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram, after full-fledged trial, found
(i)A1 guilty for the offence under Sections 148 and 323 IPC and 3(1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989 r/w 149 IPC and
(ii)A5, A7, A15, A18 and A21 guilty for the offence under Sections 148 and 323 r/w 149 IPC and
(iii)convicted A1 for the offence under Sections 148 and 323 IPC and 3(1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989 r/w 149 IPC and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 148 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 323 IPC and 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 the offence under Section 3(1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989 r/w 149 of IPC and
(iv)convicted A5, A7, A15, A18 and A21 for the offence under http://www.judis.nic.in 17 Sections 148 and 323 r/w 149 IPC and sentenced them to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each for the offence under Section 148 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each for the offence under Section 323 r/w 149 IPC.
(v)Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellants/ A1, A5, A7, A15, A18 and A21 are before this Court with this Criminal Appeal.
7.When the matter was taken up for hearing on 30.10.2008, the learned counsel for the appellant filed a memo dated 30.10.2018 stating that he is withdrawing his appearance for the appellant. This Court recorded the said memo and directed the Registry to print the names of the appellants in the cause list and post the matter on 02.11.2018. Accordingly, the matter was posted today i.e. on 02.11.2018 by printing the names of the parties. Though the names of the appellants were printed in the cause list, today, there is no representation for the appellants either in person or through counsel. Hence, this Court is inclined to dispose of the criminal appeal on merits.
http://www.judis.nic.in 18
8.Heard Mr.R.Ravichandran, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the State and perused the records carefully.
9.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) has submitted that on 11.02.2006, at around 5.30 p.m, one Sathiyanathan at Chinna Nerukunam Village Colony, had gone to his brother's house and when he was going to return to his house, 1st accused, who had driven a tractor with trailer bearing Registration No.T.N.32-Y-6-135 in a rash and negligent manner, ran over the right foot of Suhirdha, namely wife of Sathiyanathan. Eventually she developed cramp in her legs and P.W.1 and others physically supported Sathyanathan's wife and on seeing the same, 1st accused abused P.W.1 and others in filthy language making reference to their caste. Following the said incident, all the accused persons had formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with dangerous weapons as a rioting group consisting of 30 members and assaulted Sathyanathan and other persons and also caused damages to some of their houses. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Villupuram Sub Division, after completing the investigation, filed a final report before the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Tindivanam against all the aforesaid accused for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 427 r/w 149, 506(ii) of IPC & 3 (1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.
(iii)Totally there are 22 witnesses, of which, witnesses 1 to 18 http://www.judis.nic.in 19 are eye witnesses. They have clearly spoken about the incident and also the motive and involvement of the accused. Especially, P.W.1, Sankar in his evidence has stated that he belongs to Hindu, Adi- Dravidar community and he knew Sathyanathan and at the time of occurrence he was present. The 1st accused Elavarasan was driving tractor in a rash and negligent manner, at that time P.W.1 Sankar and others were standing near brother's house of Sankar and they were in the afraid manner, when the wife of Sathyanathan moved fastly, 1st accused ran over the tractor on her right foot and eventually she developed cramp in her legs and he and others physically supported the wife of Sathyanathan and on seeing the same, 1st accused abused P.W.1 and others in filthy language making reference to their caste and immediately after the said occurrence a group consisting of 30 members came there and assaulted Sathyanathan with brick on his head and 1st accused, Elavarasan, who made such assault and other accused persons were also holding stick and wooden stick and the family members of 1st accused assaulted P.W.1 and eventually he fainted and he was not able to identify as to who were the persons assaulted him and thereafter the Government Officials came to the spot and P.W.1 was taken to hospital for treatment.
(iv)P.W.2, Sathyanathan has stated in his evidence that on http://www.judis.nic.in 20 11.02.2006, P.W.1 and others were just standing near the house of his brother, who was constructing a building and at that time, 1st accused had driven a tractor with trailer in a rash and negligent manner and the wheels of the tractor ran over the foot of his wife and eventually she sustained injury and 1st accused shouted at P.W.1 and others and further abused them in filthy language making reference to their caste and following the said incident not less than 20 to 30 people had come with sticks, iron pipe and brick and accused Rajendiran assaulted on his head with brick and other accused persons in the group assaulted other persons. The complaint given by P.W.1 has been marked as Ex.P1.
(v)Likewise, P.W.3 to P.W.6 have spoken about the incident. P.W.22 after completing the investigation filed the charge sheet against the accused persons under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 427 r/w 149 IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989. The victims have clearly stated in the evidence that all the accused persons have attacked them, due to which, they have sustained injuries.
(vi)P.W.20 and P.W.21, are the doctors, who have given treatment to the victims and they also issued the accident registers Exs.P.3 to P.18. Ex.P.12, the accident register, shows that Suhirdha, http://www.judis.nic.in 21 w/o Sathyanathan was hit by the tractor at about 5.30 p.m on 11.02.2006 at Chinnanerkunam. P.W.1 in his evidence has stated that following the incident, eventually a group consisting of 30 members came there and assaulted Sathyanathan with brick on his head.
(vii)Therefore, the motive for the occurrence is that when the 1st accused/appellant was driving a tractor in a rash and negligent manner and at that time P.W.1 Sankar and others were standing near the house of brother of Sankar and because of rash and negligent driving of tractor by 1st accused, the wheel of the tractor ran over the feet of P.W.3, who is wife of P.W.2 and eventually she developed cramp in her legs and P.W.1 and others physically supported Sathyanathan's wife and on seeing the same, 1st accused abused P.W.1 and others in filthy language by making reference to their caste and immediately after the said occurrence, the appellant went to his house and taken all their family members and also their relatives forming a group consisting of 30 members, came there and assaulted the victims, in which, they have sustained injuries.
(viii)With the above witnesses, the prosecution has proved the case beyond any reasonable doubt. Hence, there is no merit in the appeal. The learned trial Judge, after conducting elaborate trial, has http://www.judis.nic.in 22 rightly convicted the accused. Therefore, the appeal has to be dismissed.
10.I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records carefully.
11.On a perusal of records, it is seen that P.W.1/Sankar has stated that when he and others were standing near brother's house of Sankar, 1st accused, in a rash and negligent manner, ran over the tractor on the right foot of P.W.3 Suhirdha and on seeing the same, 1st accused abused P.W.1 and others in filthy language making reference to their caste and immediately after the said occurrence, a group consisting of 30 members came there and assaulted Sathyanathan with brick on his head and 1st accused, Elavarasan, who made such assault and other accused persons were also holding stick and wooden stick and the family members of 1st accused assaulted P.W.1 and other victims.
12.P.W.2, Sathyanathan, who is the wife of P.W.3 has stated that Sathyanathan has stated in his evidence that on 11.02.2006, P.W.1 and others were just standing near the house of his brother, who was constructing a building and at that time, 1st accused had driven a tractor with trailer in a rash and negligent manner and the http://www.judis.nic.in 23 wheels of the tractor ran over the leg of his wife and eventually she sustained injury and 1st accused shouted at P.W.1 and others and further abused them in filthy language making reference to their caste and following the said incident not less than 20 to 30 people had come with sticks, iron pipe and brick and the accused Rajendiran assaulted on his head with brick and other accused persons in the group assaulted other persons.
13.P.W.3, Suhirdha, is the wife of P.W.2. She has spoken in her evidence that 1st accused had driven the tractor in a rash and negligent manner and the tractor ran over her feet. She further stated that 1st accused making reference of their caste of P.W.1 to P.W.3 and she further stated that immediately after the said occurrence, about 20 persons came with knife, sticks and bricks and at that time Rajendiran/A3 assaulted P.W.2 with knife on his head and Sankar, Poongodi, Loganayagi, Gopal and Hari were assaulted by group of persons.
14.The evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.18 and Ex.P.12 were clearly spoken about the occurrence that 30 persons came with a group and attacked the victims, in which, 8 victims were not able to identify the activities of the accused. But, some of the witnesses were clearly http://www.judis.nic.in 24 identified the accused.
15.The evidence of Doctors P.W.20 and P.W.21 would clearly shows that the victims have got treatment in the hospital. In respect of which, they have issued Accident Registers. The evidence of victims also corroborate with the evidence of Doctors.
16.Moreover, the evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.3 clearly shows that the 1st appellant, Elavarasan had driven a tractor in a rash and negligent manner and caused injuries to P.W.3. Thereafter, when the same was questioned by P.W.1, the appellant/A1 scolded him in a filthy language and eventually, he has taken 15 members from his family and relatives and immediately went to the occurrence place and attacked P.W.1 to P.W.3 and other victims. The prosecution witnesses clearly identified the appellants and overtact attributed by them.
17.Therefore, from the oral and documentary evidence, the prosecution has clearly proved the case beyond reasonable doubt.
18.(i)The learned trial Judge, rightly convicted A1 for the offence under Sections 148 and 323 IPC and 3(1) (x) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989 r/w 149 IPC and convicted A5, A7, A15, A18 and A21 for the http://www.judis.nic.in 25 offence under Sections 148 and 323 r/w 149 IPC and sentenced them as stated supra and there is no merit in the appeal. Hence, there is no reason to interfere with the judgment passed by the trial Court.
In the result, the criminal appeal stands dismissed confirming the conviction and sentence imposed on appellants in S.C.No.192 of 2010 on the file of the Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge), Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram. The period of sentence already undergone by the appellant/A1, A5, A7, A15, A18 and A21 shall be set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. The trial Court is directed to take steps to secure the custody of the appellants to undergo the remaining period of sentence if any.
02.11.2018 cla Index:Yes Speaking Order:Yes/No To
1.The Special Judge (Principal Sessions Judge), Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram.
2.The Public Prosecutor, http://www.judis.nic.in High Court, Madras.
26
P.VELMURUGAN.J., cla Judgment in Crl.A.No.394 of 2014 02.11.2018 http://www.judis.nic.in