This revision challenges the judgment of learned Principal District Judge, Thiruvallur, passed in S.C.No.172 of 2014 dated 19.12.2016.
2. Case of the prosecution is that on 12.12.2011 at about 22.30 hours the petitioner/A1 along with A2 and A3 abused the defacto complainant by calling his caste name and petitoner/A1 attacked the defacto complaint using a stone and caused injury to his nose, 2nd accused shed blows on the defacto complainant, using his hand and 3rd accused kicked him causing injuries to the defacto complainant also thereby, committing offence u/s. 294(b),336 and Sec.3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act 1989 and Sec.3(1) of PPD Act. The case was taken on file by the Judicial Magistrate II, Thiruvallur in PRC No.9/2012 and the same was transferred to the District Sessions Court, Thiruvallur and renumbered as S.C.No.172/2014.
3. Before the Court below, prosecution examined ten witnesses and marked nine exhibits. None were examined nor any witness were marked on the side of defence. By order dated 19.12.2016, learned Principal District Judge, Thiruvallur, while acquitting the other two accused of all charges acquitted the petitioner/A1 of offence u/s. 294(b) and Sec.3(1)(X) of SC/St Act 1989 and Sec.3(1) of PPD Act but convicted the petitioner/A1 for offence u/s. 336 IPC and sentenced him to undergo 1 month SI and fine of Rs.250/- i/d 2 weeks S.I. There against, present revision stands filed.
4. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for respondent.
5. Even while acquitting the petitioner and other accused of offences u/s. 294(b) and Sec.3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act 1989 and Sec.3(1) of PPD Act, Court below on a proper appreciation of the evidence on record and finding that the version of P.W.1 regards the injury to his nose and damage to his spectacles, has been corroborated by the evidence of P.W.6-Doctor found it fit to convict him u/s. 336 IPC. Court below has sentenced him to 1 month S.I and fine of Rs.250/- i/d 2 weeks S.I. The fine imposed on the petitioner has been paid. It is brought to notice that the petitioner has undergone sentence between 13.12.2011 and 21.12.2011.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court while confirming the fine imposed on the petitioner would reduce the sentence to the period already undergone by him. This Criminal revision petition is disposed of accordingly. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
06.02.2017 Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no C.T.SELVAM, J kpr To
1.The Principal District Judge, Thiruvallur
2.The Inspector of Police B-5, Manavalanagar Police Station Thiruvallur District
3.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras Crl.R.C.No.123 of 2017 06.02.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in