The Additional District Sessions Judge, by order dated 27.10.2005, sentenced A 1 to A 6 to suffer rigorous imprisonment RI for 6 months for the offence punishable under Section 342 of IPC and imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC along with a fine of Rs.
After investigation, charges were framed against all the above named accused persons including Senthil A 7 under Section 302 read with Section 34, Section 120 B and Section 342 IPC and the case was companymitted to the Court of the Additional District Sessions Judge, Salem and was numbered as Sessions Case No.
When Chitra informed ArumugamArupaiyan about Palanichami, he companyfronted the cleaner and when the driver of the car Senthil A 7 asked him as to why he companyfronted him, ArumugamArupaiyan started beating Senthil which resulted in enmity between A 7 and ArumugamArupaiyan.
Saravanan A 1 , RajaSasikumar A 2 , NatesanNatarajan A 3 , Karthik A 4 , ChandranChandramohan A 5 and Sakthivel A 6 , intercepted him and prevented him from going further from that spot and A 1 inflicted a sickle blow on his hand.
A 7 also developed grudge against one Babu the deceased, friend of ArumugamArupaiyan, who also helped him during the abovesaid incident and even at one point of time, when both the groups were fighting, A 7 shouted at him that he A 7 will number spare him at any companyt.
The Division Bench of the High Court, by order dated 15.03.2007, disposed of the appeal by acquitting A 4 to A 6 while sustaining the companyviction and sentence of A 1 to A 3.
In order to escape, Babu went inside the shed of one Sengodan PW 3 , but A 1, A 2 and A 3 also went inside that shed and inflicted cuts on him indiscriminately as a result of which he fell down and the accused persons fled away assuming that he was dead.
963 of 2005 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court disposed of the appeal by acquitting A4 to A6 and companyfirmed the order of companyviction and sentence dated 27.10.2005 in respect of A1 to A3 passed by the Additional District Sessions Judge, Salem in Sessions Case No.
One ArumugamArupaiyan, who was working as a car driver at Sadurangadi, Mettur, was having an affair with one Chitra PW 6 , who, at the relevant time, was working at Krishna Medicals.
Being aggrieved of the order dated 27.10.2005, A 1 to A 6 filed Criminal Appeal No.
However, A 1 to A 7 were acquitted under Section 120 B IPC and A 7 was acquitted of all the charges.
Babu was immediately taken to the Government Hospital, Mettur for treatment by one Radhakrishnan PW 2 and Sengodan PW 3 but he succumbed to his injuries.
Based on the said incident, the accused persons, including the present appellants, threatened the deceased and his persons.
Radhakrishnan PW 2 lodged a companyplaint against the accused persons with the Police Station, Mettur which was registered as FIR No.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.03.2007 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal No.
Being aggrieved by the order of the High Court, A 2 and A 3 has preferred this appeal by way of special leave before this Court.
The companyplainant has also stated that with the aid of one Sengodan PW 3 , he admitted Babu in the Government Hospital at Mettur for treatment but in spite of the same, he succumbed to the injuries.
1,000/ each, in default, to further undergo RI for 3 months.
On 18.04.2001, when Babu was trying to start his motorcycle, the accused persons, viz.,
The same has been endorsed by the Inspector, Mettur on 18.04.2001 at 2130 hrs.
254 of 2004.
254 of 2004.
402 of 2001 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC .
One Palanichami, who was working as a car cleaner, too was in love with her.
963 of 2005 before the High Court.
It is also asserted that it was A 1 to A 3 who inflicted cut injuries on Babu the deceased .
The facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are as under This case relates to the death of one person by name Babu resident of Kullaveeranpatti, Mettur, Tamil Nadu.
Heard Mr. V. Kanagaraj, learned senior companynsel for the appellants accused and Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, learned companynsel for the respondent State.
Sathasivam,CJI.
Senthil A 7 questioned the same, Arupaiyan had beaten Senthil.
In the said companyplaint, PW 2 has made a specific reference about the role of A 1, A 2 and A 3.
