Madras High Court
Rajaraman vs The Inspector Of Police on 14 March, 2023
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 14.03.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016
1.Rajaraman
2.Yuvaraj ... Revision Petitioners/
Appellants/Accused Nos.1 & 2
Vs.
The Inspector of Police,
Swamimalai Police Station,
Thanjavur District.
(Crime No.196 of 2012). ... Respondent/Respondent/
Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records of the learned
II-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur in Crl.A.No.73
of 2014, by Judgment dated 22.06.2015, confirming the conviction
and sentence imposed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Thanjavur at Kumbakonam in C.C.No.5 of 2013, by
Judgment dated 17.11.2014 and set aside the Judgments of the
Courts below and acquit the petitioners.
For Petitioners : Ms.S.Prabha
for Mr.D.Ramesh Kumar
For Respondent : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/10
Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016
ORDER
This Revision has been filed to set aside the Judgment in Crl.A.No.73 of 2014, dated 22.06.2015, passed by the learned II- Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thanjavur at Kumbakonam in C.C.No.5 of 2013, dated 17.11.2014.
2.The case of the prosecution is that there is a Temple Arulmighu Rukumani Sathiyabama Udanurai Arulmighu Venugopalsamy Thirukovil situated at Puliyancheri Akraharam and it belongs to P.W.1-Sudarshan family, in which one P.W.2-Ravichandran is performing as Gurukkal. In the said Temple, daily there was a pooja performed by the said P.W.2 and every day, after performing the pooja, the said P.W.2 handed over the key to the Temple to P.W.1. While being so, on 22.10.2012, after performing the pooja in the Temple, P.W.2 handed over the key to P.W.1. On 23.10.2012, there was heavy rain and therefore, on that day, no pooja was performed and as such, on 24.12.2012, when the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/10 Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016 said P.W.2, after receiving the key, went to the Temple. He opened the outdoor and found that the inner side of the door was broken and the locks were also broken. Immediately, he informed P.W.1 and found that 13 idols were missing. They are worth about Rs.50,000/-. Immediately, P.W.1 lodged the complaint before P.W.6. After registration of F.I.R in Crime No.196 of 2012 for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 of I.P.C, the investigating officer started the investigation. On 31.10.2012, while pending investigation at Puliyancheri bus stop at about 06.00 p.m., near Sambath Grocery shop, the accused persons were standing there and they were enquired. During the enquiry, they gave a confession statement that they only had stolen the idols. After completion of the investigation, the respondent filed a final report and the same has been taken cognizance by the trial Court in C.C.No.5 of 2013 on the file of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thanjavur at Kumbakonam as against both the petitioners/accused.
3.On the side of the prosecution, they had examined P.W.1 to P.W.8 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.11. The prosecution also marked material objects which was marked as M.O.1 to M.O.18 and on the side of the accused, no one was examined and no exhibits https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/10 Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016 were marked.
4.On perusal of oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court found the accused persons guilty for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 of I.P.C and for the offence under Section 457(2) of I.P.C., sentenced both the accused to undergo five years Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default, in payment of fine amount, three months Simple Imprisonment and for the offence under Section 380(2) of I.P.C., sentenced both the accused to undergo 2 years Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/- each, in default, in payment of fine amount, three months Simple Imprisonment. Both the sentences shall go concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, both the accused persons filed an appeal in Crl.A.No.73 of 2014 on the file of the learned II-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur and the Appellate Court confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. Hence, the present revision.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/10 Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016
5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that there are contradictions between P.W.1 and P.W.2 themselves. The occurrence had taken place on 22.10.2012, whereas the complaint lodged only on 24.10.2012. In fact, the F.I.R also reached the court belatedly. The complaint was written by P.W.1 and alleged that 11 idols were missing, however, he deposed before the trial Court that 12 idols were missing. However, the respondent recovered 14 metal objects which were marked as Exs.M.O.1 to M.O.14. Therefore, it is fatal to the case of the prosecution and both the Courts below, unfortunately, convicted the petitioners. P.W.2, who had visited the Temple on 24.12.2012, stated that he found the locks were broken open, and 12 idols were missing, which is a complete contradiction to the version of P.W.1. In fact, the prosecution also failed to seize the broken locks. Therefore, the entire conviction cannot be sustained as against the petitioners and prayed for acquittal from all the charges.
6.Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the prosecution in order to bring the charges to home had examined P.W.1 to P.W.8 and all the metal objects were produced as M.O.1 to M.O.18. On the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/10 Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016 confession of the petitioners, the stolen idols were recovered from them and the same was duly identified by P.W.1 and P.W.2. Therefore, there was recovery from the petitioners and the Court below rightly convicted them for the offence punishable under Sections 457(2) and 380(2) of I.P.C and as such, there is absolutely no possibility for acquittal, since the prosecution categorically proved its case beyond any doubt.
7.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
8.There are totally two accused, in which the petitioners are arraigned as A.1 and A.2. The case of the prosecution is that P.W.1 owned the Temple and P.W.2 is performing daily pooja in the Temple. While being so, on 24.10.2012, when he visited the Temple for performing pooja, he found locks were broken and idols were missing from the Temple. Immediately, it was informed to P.W.1 and he lodged the complaint. P.W.2 performed pooja in the Temple on 22.10.2012 and handed over the Temple key to P.W.1. On 23.10.2012, there was heavy rain and as such, P.W.2 did not conduct any pooja in the Temple. Therefore, on 24.10.2012, he https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/10 Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016 visited the Temple to perform pooja and he found that the idols were stolen by the accused. Immediately, it was informed to P.W.1 and lodged the complaint and the same was marked as Ex.P.1. Absolutely, there was no delay in the lodgment of the complaint. Immediately, after seeing the Temple, which was break opened and informed P.W.1 and immediately, he lodged the complaint.
9.In so far as the identification of the idols is concerned, P.W.1 and P.W.2 identified the idols which were recovered from the petitioners. On the confession of the accused recovery was made and produced before the trial Court as material objects M.O.1 to M.O.18. While the accused were standing at the bus stop, on suspicion, the accused were enquired by the Investigating Officer and they themselves confessed that they had stolen the idols. As per the confession, recovered the idols from the fishpond in the presence of P.W.4. P.W.4 deposed that while he was drinking tea, both the accused persons were enquired by the Investigating Officer and they were in possession of some of the idols. In his presence, they confessed and seized the idols by the Investigating Officer. When the confession of the accused leads to recovery, it is admissible in evidence. In fact, the idols were also duly identified by https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/10 Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016 P.W.1 and P.W.2. Therefore, the small contradictions between P.W.1 and P.W.2 would not affect the case of the prosecution. Some of the idols were in possession of the accused and some of the idols were hidden in a pond. On their confession, the other idols were recovered from the pond, which was identified by the accused persons. Therefore, a number of idols stolen from the Temple have been duly identified and marked as material objects M.O.1 to M.O.14. The numbers of the idols as stated by P.W.1 and P.W.2 are not fatal to the case of the prosecution. Therefore, both the Courts below rightly convicted the petitioners for the offences under Sections 457(2) and 380(2) of I.P.C.
10.However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that considering the age of the accused persons, the sentence may be reduced.
11.Considering the said submission, this Court is inclined to reduce the sentence alone for the offence under Section 457(2) of I.P.C.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 8/10 Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016
12.In fine, the conviction of the trial Court is hereby confirmed and the sentence imposed against the petitioners for the offence under Section 457(2) of I.P.C is reduced to three years each. The punishment imposed on the petitioners under Section 380(2) of I.P.C is confirmed. Both the sentences shall run concurrently.
13.Accordingly, this Criminal Revision case is partly allowed.
14.03.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
ps
To
1.The II-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Thanjavur.
2.The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thanjavur at Kumbakonam.
3.The Inspector of Police, Swamimalai Police Station, Thanjavur District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 9/10 Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
ps Order made in Crl.R.C(MD)No.471 of 2016 14.03.2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 10/10