Anand Subramaniyam v. State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.1542 of 2022 Crl.O.P.No.1542 of 2022 in Crl.A.SR.No.46791 of 2021 A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

(This case has been heard through Video conference) The learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant would submit that the accused had committed acts of rioting and dacoity and by setting fire to the house belonging to the victims had caused damage to the public properties. The evidence of PW1, PW6, PW7, PW8 and PW13 are cogent and clinching. The trial Court ignoring the evidence of the witnesses by relying upon the minor contradictions and relying upon the evidence of hostile witnesses had erred in acquitting the accused. The trial Court erred in brushing aside the evidence of eyewitnesses in this case.

2. Having heard the counsel and perused the materials available on record, this Court is of the opinion that a prima facie case is made out for grant of leave.

3. Leave granted.

31.01.2022.

tsh Note: Registry is directed to number the appeal, if it is otherwise in order. 1/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.1542 of 2022 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J.

tsh Crl.O.P.No.1542 of 2022 in Crl.A.SR.No.46791 of 2021 31.01.2022.

2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis