Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
1.3. The trial court framed charges U/s 294(b), 354, 509, 506(ii), 306, 355 IPC and Sec 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act against the 1st , 3rd and 4th accused and Under Section 294, 509, 506(ii), 354, 355 and 306 IPC against the 2nd accused. All the accused denied all the charges framed against them.
http://www.judis.nic.in
2. On the side of the prosecution PW-1 to 12 were examined and Ex.P1 to P7 were marked. No material object marked. The defence side does not produce any evidence. The trial court after considering the materials on record found the first accused guilty Under Section 294(b), 354, 355, 506(ii), 509, 306 IPC and Sec 4(B) Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act and A2 to A4 were found guilty U/s 294(b),355 and 509 IPC and convicted. The first accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo 3 month RI and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- i/d to undergo 1 months RI U/s 294(b) IPC, 2 years RI and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- i/d to undergo 6 months RI for the offence U/s 354 IPC, 2 years RI and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- i/d to undergo 6 months RI for the offence U/s 355 IPC, 5 years RI and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- i/d to undergo 3 years RI for the offence U/s 506(ii) IPC, 1 years RI and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- i/d to undergo 3 months RI for the offence U/s 509 IPC, 10 years RI and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- i/d to undergo 3 years RI for the offence U/s 306 IPC, 10 years RI and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- i/d to undergo 3 years RI for the offence U/s 4(B) Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. The above sentences are to run consecutively. Set off is allowed U/s 428 of Cr.P.C.
A2 to A4 were convicted and sentenced
i). to pay fine of Rs.1000/- i/d one month RI for offence U/s 294(b) IPC,
ii). And to pay fine of Rs.2000/- i/d 6 months RI for offence U/s 355 of http://www.judis.nic.in IPC And to pay fine of Rs.1000/- i/d 3 months RI for offence U/s 509 of IPC, And A2 found not guilty U/s 506(ii) and A3 and A4 found not guilty U/s 506(ii) and r/w 4(B) Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act and acquitted them in the above charges by the trial court and the court also awarded a sum of Rs.41,500/- out of the total fine amount of Rs.83,000/- as compensation to the father of the deceased.
On perusal of records, it is seen that actually the charges were framed by the trial court as follows:-
Firstly- U/s 294(b) IPC against A1 to A4 Secondly- U/s 354 IPC against A1 to A4 Thirdly- U/s 509 IPC against A1 to A4 Fourthly-U/s 506(ii) IPC against A1 to A4 Fifthly- U/s 306 IPC against A1 to A4 Sixthly- U/s 352 IPC against A1 to A4 Seventhly –U/s 4 Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. However, the trial court convicted A1 to A4 U/s 355 of IPC for which no charge is framed.
11. As far as Sec 355 of IPC is concerned nothing is available to show that A1 with other accused committed the Act with an intent to dishonor the deceased by doing an act with force and as such, Sec 355 of IPC is also not attracted.
12. As far as Sec 506(ii) of IPC is concerned, there is no evidence that A1 armed with any weapon or otherwise to cause threat of dire consequences to the deceased and so, no offence U/s 506(ii) of IPC is made out.