Madras High CourtCRL A(MD)/240/2016disposed of

Chellam @ Selvaraj @ Selvakumar v. The Inspector Of Police

2020-12-21Honourable Mr Justice G.R.Swaminathan2 pages

Crl.A.(MD)No.240 of 2016 Bail Slip The Appellant herein /1st Accused viz;Chellam @ Selvaraj @ Selvakumar, S/o Chelladurai,aged about(26/2016) Ist Accused ,was released on Bail vide order of this Court dated 12/7/2016 in Crl.M.P (MD)No.5353/2016 in Crl.A(MD)No.240/2016.

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 21.12.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Crl.A(MD)No.240 of 2016 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.7105 of 2020 Chellam @ Selvaraj @ Selvakumar ... Appellant/Ist Accused Vs State represented by Inspector of Police, Sathankulam Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

(Crime No.136 of 2014) ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER: Appeal filed under Section 389(1) of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in S.C.No.292 of 2015 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court) Thoothukudi and set aside the Judgment imposing sentence and conviction by its Judgment dated 01.06.2016 by allowing this appeal. For Appellant : Mr.S.R.Anbarasu For Respondent : Mr.A.Robinson Government Advocate (Crl.side)

JUDGMENT

The appellant was prosecuted for the offences under Sections 376 and 417 of IPC in S.C.No.292 of 2015, on the file of the Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram/Fast Track Mahila Court, Thoothukudi. The Court below acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 376 of IPC and convicted and sentenced him only for the offence under Section 417 of IPC. Questioning the same, this appeal came to be filed. During the pendency of this appeal proceedings, the matter had been settled.

2.It appears that the appellant had built a house worth about Rs.9,50,000/- for the benefit of the defacto complainant. The defacto complainant Pushpa appears before the Court through web hearing. The compromise memo has also been signed both by the parties as well as by the counsel. The defacto complainant has no objection for compounding the offence. Since the parties have https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

Crl.A.(MD)No.240 of 2016 amicably resolved the issue between themselves, the impugned Judgment is set aside.

3.The appeal is allowed in terms of the compromise. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) rmi Note:In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. Encl: Photocopy of the Joint Compromise memo. To 1.The Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram (Fast Track Mahila Court) Thoothukudi. 2.The Principal District Judge,Thoothukudi.

3.The Judicial Magistrate ,Sathankulam.

4.-do- Thro The Chief Judicial Magistrate ,Thoothukudi. 5.The Inspector of Police, Sathankulam Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

6.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

7.The Section Officer (Criminal Section), Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,Madurai.

+1 CC to M/s S.R.Anbarasu ,Advocate,in SR.No.26934. Crl.A.(MD)No.240 of 2016 21.12.2020 (PK)CO AP(21/01/2021) 2P 9C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2