Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: thiruvarur in Jeyaraman vs The State Rep. By on 27 June, 2018Matching Fragments
The appellant herein is the sole accused in S.C.No.46 of 2009 on the file of the District and Sessions Court, Thiruvarur. Initially, in the trial Court, during the time of framing charges, the offence under Section 302 IPC had been framed against the accused. Thereafter, after concluding the trial, the learned District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur came to the conclusion that the appellant is found guilty for the offence under Section 304(ii) IPC and sentenced him to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- i/d to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment. Against the said judgment, the appellant approached this Court by way of this criminal appeal and prayed to set aside the conviction and sentence.
12. More over, since the offence has happened without any motive or intention, the trial Court itself altered the Section of law and awarded the punishment under Section 304(ii) IPC. Hence, it does not want any interference from this Court and this Criminal appeal is liable to be dismissed.
13. Accordingly, the criminal appeal is dismissed and the sentence awarded by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur in S.C.No.46 of 2009 on 09.03.2011 is confirmed. The respondent is directed to secure the appellant for the purpose of sentencing him to undergo the remaining period of conviction. It is also directed that the period of sentence already undergone by the appellant shall be given set off, as required under Section 428 Cr.P.C.
27.06.2018 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking order/non-speaking order rts To
1. The Presiding Officer The District and Session Court, Thiurvarur.
2. The Inspector of Police, Thalayamangalam Police Station, Thalayamangalam Post, Mannargudi Thaluk, Thiruvarur District.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
R.PONGIAPPAN, J.
rts CRL.A.384 of 2011 27.06.2018