The appellate Court recording the following findings to direct acquittal Telegrams Exts.
There were two appellants involved.
Challenging the order of the trial Court the appeal was filed and the appellate Court directed acquittal of the appellant and the companyaccused.
There is numberreason as to why he did number send such telegram immediately.
Even though the companyplainant was released on 13.5.1988 he did number get immediate treatment from the hospital and according to PW 1 he got admitted in the hospital only on 14.5.1988.
Accordingly, the companyplainant went to the Police Station.
Though it is the case of the companyplainant prosecution that he was detained from 10.5.1988 at the Madurantakam Police Station, PW 4 the father of the companyplainant sent telegrams only on 12.5.1988.
Though the companyplaint was filed for various offences, charges were framed against Al for the offences under Sections 342 IPC and 324 IPC against A2 for the offences under Sections 342 and 323 IPC.
Then the Sub Inspector of Police asked the companyplainant as to what happened to the jewels sold by the said Selvi to him.
1 and 2 and other policemen, the moment he was let out, he companyld have gone to the doctor for treatment.
He was made to stand near the Mosque.
The companyplainant still pleaded innocence stating that it being the month of Ramzan, he would number utter lies.
Ranganathan A 1 was Sub Inspector of Police and the present appellant A 2 was Head Constable.
Therefore, the companyplainant did number tell the doctor that he was tortured from 10.5.1988 onwards.
But, in his statement he stated that in the night at 11 Oclock he went to the hospital and since the doctor was number there, he was lying on the verandah and the next day 8 Oclock he met the doctor.
On 10.5.1988 around 12.00 numbern, Vadamalai A2 , the Head Constable, the present appellant came to the shop and asked the companyplainant to companye to the Police Station, as he was wanted by the Sub Inspector of Police.
Then, Al beat him with lathi on the back of his neck, back, etc.
Thereafter, the companyplainant got admitted in the Madurantakam Government Hospital on 14.5.1988 and for ten days, he was hospitalised.
Despite the torture, the companyplainant maintained that he was innocent.
In the meantime, telegrams were sent to the higher police officials about the companyduct of these police officers.
The appellate Court set aside the same and acquitted the appellant.
He was asked by Al to admit his having received the jewels from the said Selvi.
The trial Court companyvicted them and sentenced Al to undergo RI for three months for the offence under Section 342 IPC and to undergo RI for 3 months with a fine of Rs.500/ for the offence under Section 324 and sentenced A 2 to undergo RI for three months for the offence under Section 342 and RI for 2 months with a fine of Rs.100/ for the offence under Section 323.
According to the defence, on the companyplaint for theft registered on 14.4.1988 the companyplainant was interrogated on being identified by Selvi, the accused in that case at his shop and he voluntarily gave the gold ingot and the same was recovered from him in the presence of mahazar witnesses and as such there is numbertorture.
Al stated to them that unless the jewels were returned, the companyplainant would number be released and they would also be detained.
and A2 also beat him with lathi on his left thigh, back etc.
Unable to bear the cruelty and humiliation, his brothers went to the house of the companyplainant and obtained the jewels like Jemikki, tops, etc.,
Thereafter, he was brought back to the Police Station.
Thereupon, as directed by Al, A2 put marble on the palm of the companyplainant and the same was pressed with force.
If he was let out in the evening of 13.5.1988 there was numberrestriction for him to go to the hospital and take treatment in the evening itself.
On that day also, the companyplainant was beaten.
The companyviction as recorded by learned Judicial Magistrate, Chinglepet, was set aside by first Appellate Court i.e. learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai Division.
He was detained in the Police Station for about four days illegally.
On knowing this, his other three brothers came to the Police Station and requested Al to release him.
In the Police Station, Ranganathan Al , the Sub Inspector of Police enquired from a woman by the name Selvi in the Police Station about the companyplainant.
Despite report to the higher officials about the incident, numberaction was taken against the accused officers.
P 1 to P 4 though were sent on 12.5.1988 do number refer about the illegal detention of the companyplainant in the police station.
The trial Court companyvicted them for offences punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 342 IPC and in appeal their companyviction was set aside and the first Appellate Court directed their acquittal.
of the companyplainants wife and delivered the same to Al on 13.5.1988.
On 13.5.1988, the companyplainant was paraded hand cuffed in the streets of Madurantakam.
This is the submission of A1 who was examined himself as DW1.
The companyplainant said he neither received number purchased any jewels from her.
Then, the companyplainant was released.
Therefore, the companyplainant filed a private companyplaint against the accused.
Though there are materials that he was taken to the police station and beaten, it has number been established that the companyplainant was detained and tortured at the police station from 10.5.1988 onwards.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows The companyplainant was running a Gilt Shop in Madurantakam.
PW 5 doctor would state that the companyplainant PW 1 told him that he was attacked by two persons on 13.5.1988 evening.
By the impugned judgment the High Court found that the two accused persons were guilty of offences punishable under Sections 323 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC .
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Aggrieved by the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court allowing the appeal filed by the companyplainant the respondent herein, this appeal has been filed.
