Madras High Court
Saravanan vs State Rep. By on 11 January, 2023
Author: P.Velmurugan
Bench: P.Velmurugan
Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.01.2023
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Criminal Revision Case No.1074 of 2020
Saravanan ... Petitioner
Vs.
State rep. by
The Inspector of Police (L&O)
C-4, Rathinapuri Police Station
Coimbatore District
in Cr.No.86 of 2012 ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 read with 401 of
Criminal Procedure Code, praying to call for the records relating to the
Judgment passed in C.A.No.334 of 2019 dated 28.02.2020 on the file of
the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, confirming
the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.51 of 2017
dated 06.09.2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II,
Coimbatore and set aside the same and acquit the petitioner.
For Petitioners : No Appearance
For Respondent : Mr.R.Murthi
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
1/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed against the Judgment passed in C.A.No.334 of 2019 dated 28.02.2020 on the file of the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, confirming the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.51 of 2017 dated 06.09.2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Coimbatore and set aside the same and acquit the petitioner.
2. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation for the revision petitioner.
3. It is seen that the cause of action of this case arose in the year 2012 and the charge is for the offence under Sections 380 and 454 of IPC. Since the case is pending from the year 2020, this Court is inclined to dispose of the case on merit after perusing the records and hearing the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side).
2/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020
4. The respondent police registered a case against the accused in Crime No.86 of 2012 and after investigation, laid charge sheet before the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Coimbatore as against the 1st accused/petitioner herein for the offence under Sections 454 and 380 IPC and as against the 2nd accused for the offence under Section 411 IPC. The learned Magistrate taken the charge sheet on file in C.C.No.51 of 2017 and after framing the charges and trial, found the guilt of the accused and convicted them and sentenced the 1st accused to undergo 2 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- indefault, to undergo 2 months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 454 IPC; to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- indefault, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 380 IPC. Further, the 2nd accused was sentenced to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.500/- indefault, to undergo 1 month simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 411 IPC. Further, the period of sentence already undergone by the accused was ordered to be set of under Section 428 Cr.P.C. and the 3/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020 sentences were ordered to be run concurrently along with the sentence imposed in C.C.No.290 of 2016 dated 06.09.2019.
5. Aggrieved over the said Judgment of conviction and sentence, the 1st accused filed appeal before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, and the same was taken on file in C.A.No.334 of 2019 and made over to the learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore. The learned Judge, after hearing the arguments and considering the materials, dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court. Against the Judgment of dismissal of appeal, the 1st accused/appellant therein has filed the present revisions before this Court.
6. The case of the prosecution is that on 17.02.2012, the 1st accused entered into a room in the Seshathri Mahal situated at Chennai to Kovai 100 feet road and stolen gold jewels weighing about 10 Sovereigns belongs to one Visalakshi/P.W.3 who is the wife of P.W.1, worth about Rs.2 lakhs. In continuation of the above offence, the 2nd 4/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020 accused has received the said jewels from the 1st accused for lesser amount knowing fully well that the jewels are stone one. Hence, the case.
7. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he was involved in several cases and this is not a only one case against him. He would submit that the petitioner has committed theft of gold jewels and cash from the marriage halls in various places. After forming a special team, collecting CCTV footages and thorough investigation, the petitioner was arrested. Further, the petitioner himself has admitted the commission of offence and based on his confession statement, recovery was also effected and the same was proved through independent witness. In this case, the petitioner had melted the jewels stolen from the defacto complainant and made as gold ingots weighing 63.5 grams. After recovery of the same, the defacto complainant/P.W.1 has taken the gold ingots by filing a petition before the Magistrate and later during trial, the photograph of the gold ingots 5/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020 was produced before the trial Court and the same was also identified and marked through P.W.1 as Ex.P.2. Therefore, both the trial Court as well as the lower appellate Court rightly appreciated and re-appreciated the entire evidence and convicted the accused. Therefore, there is no merit in the revisions and the revisions are liable to be dismissed.
8. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and also perused the materials available on record.
9. The defacto complainant was examined as P.W.1 and he has spoken about attending a marriage at Seshathri Mahal at Kovai and finding their jewels missing and lodging a complaint on 24.02.2012 at Rathinapuri Police Station. Subsequently, on 02.03.2016, the police called him and informed that they have caught the accused who stolen their jewels and asked him to come to Kovai. Hence, on 03.03.2016, he went to Kattur Police Station wherein, they showed him the 1 st accused/petitioner herein and informed that he is the one who had stolen 6/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020 their jewels. At that time, the defacto complainant remembered that the 1st accused/petitioner herein was the one who called him to have lunch in the Marriage Hall at the time of occurrence and the defacto complainant informed the same to the Inspector of Police. Further, he has deposed that the stolen jewels were melted and made as gold ingots weighing 63.5 grams and subsequently, he received the gold ingots weighting 8 sovereigns (one big and one small gold ingots) by filing a petition before the Court and that the gold ingots in the photograph/Ex.P.2 is the one which he received from the Court. P.W.2 who is the Father-in-law of P.W.1 has also corroborated the evidence of P.W.1.
10. P.W.5 is an independent witness and he has deposed that on 04.02.2016 his uncle's daughter's marriage took place and on the next day i.e. on 05.02.2016 when his uncle went to railway station and opened the bag, the jewels were found missing and therefore, he lodged a complaint. Thereafter on 02.03.2016, P.W.5 received a call from the Inspector of Police stating that based on the CCTV footage taken from the marriage hall, they have arrested 2 persons and asked him to come 7/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020 near North Kovai Sinthamani. When he went there, one Karthikeyan was already there and before them, the 1st accused/the petitioner herein and another accused gave confession to the Inspector of Police admitting wherever they committed theft and what are the things they stolen and in the said confession statements, P.W.5 and the said Karthikeyan signed as witnesses. Thereafter, on 03.03.2016, 1st accused taken them to his house stating that he has kept 22 sovereigns of stolen jewels in his house. Subsequently, he took the jewels from his house toilet and handed over to the police and the same was recovered through mahazar in which also P.W.5 and the said Karthikeyan signed as witnesses. Thereafter, at about 10 a.m., the 1st accused/petitioner herein and another accused took them to the place of one another accused namely Vinodh who is in R.S.Puram Arunachalam Street and the said Vinodh handed over gold ingots stating that the same were handed over to him by the 1st and another accused, out of which, at 10.15 a.m., the gold ingot weighing 15 sovereigns melted from the gold jewels stolen from the marriage held in Sivanandha Colony Lions Club; at 1.00 p.m., the gold ingot weighing 15 sovereigns melted 8/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020 from the gold jewels stolen from Ramnagar Iyyappa Pooja Sangam; at about 2.00 p.m., the gold ingot weighing 8 sovereigns melted from the gold jewels stolen from the marriage hall namely Seshathri Mahal were handed over to the Inspector of Police by the said Vinodh/A3 which was seen by P.W.5 and the said Karthikeyan. Further he has stated that in the recovery mahazars which were prepared separately for the above said properties, P.W.5 and the said Karthikeyan signed as witnesses and that the 1st accused/petitioner herein while giving confession before the Inspector of Police, confessed that he had stolen the gift amount of Rs.1,78,000/-.
11. Ex.P.4 is the statement leading to recover the stolen property, made by the 1st accused/petitioner herein and Ex.P.5 is the recovery mahazar. Though the confession statement made before the police officer is not admissible in evidence, the portion which is leading to recover the stolen property is admissible in evidence.
9/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020
12. It is settled proposition of law that while exercising the power of revisional jurisdiction, the revisional Court cannot sit in the arm chair of the appellate Court and re-appreciate or re-visit the entire evidence and substitute its own views on the findings given by the final Court of fact finding namely the lower appellate Court. The lower appellate Court has already re-appreciated the entire evidence and given its findings. The scope of the revision is only to go through the records and if the Court finds any perversity in the appreciation and re-appreciation of evidence or illegality in the findings of the Courts below, the revision Court can interfere otherwise, the revisional Court need not interfere with the Judgements of the Courts below.
13. In this case, from the evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.5 and recovery mahazar/Ex.P.5, the prosecution proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt.
14. A reading of the entire materials, oral and documentary evidence, especially the statement given by the accused/petitioner herein, 10/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020 through which recovery was effected, this Courts finds that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he was involved in several cases of same nature. Further, based on the statement leading to recovery/Ex.P.4, recovery was effected and the same was also proved through an independent witness/P.W.5. Therefore, both the trial Court as well as the lower appellate Court rightly appreciated and re-appreciated the entire evidence and also convicted the petitioner.
15. As a revisional Court, this Court while perusing the records, finds no perversity in the appreciation and re-appreciation of evidence by both the Courts below. Therefore, there is no merit in the revision and the revision is liable to be dismissed.
16. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed.
11.01.2023 (3/7) ksa-2 P.VELMURUGAN ksa-2 11/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.RC.No.1074 of 2020 To
1.The1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore
2. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Coimbatore,
3.The Inspector of Police (L&O) C-4, Rathinapuri Police Station Coimbatore District
4. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai Criminal Revision Case No.1074 of 2020 11.01.2023 (3/7) 12/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis