All the awarded sentences were to run companycurrently.
As mentioned above, the appellant was acquitted from all other charges.
By Judgment order dated 17.05.2006, the Additional Sessions Judge companyvicted the appellant herein A1 for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 203 IPC, Section 36A and E of the Tamil Nadu Forest Act and Section 3 read with Section 25 1B a of the Arms Act and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2000/ and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months under Section 302 IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs.500/, in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for three months under Section 203 IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs.7,500/, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for three months under Section 36A and E of the Tamil Nadu Forest Act, to undergo imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs.500/ in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months under Section 3 read with Section 25 1B a of the Arms Act.
AB 8202321, empty cartridge and two other cartridges to you.
The appellant was accordingly awarded sentence as mentioned above.
The appellant herein A1 along with companyaccusedChinnakolandai A2 were tried for the companymission of the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Sections 109 and 203 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter referred to as IPC , Section 36A and E of the Tamil Nadu Forest Act, 1882 and Section 3 read with Section 25 1B a of the Arms Act in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri in Session Case No.342/2004.
15 MOs were marked.
So far as the order acquitting companyaccused Chinnakonlandai A2 was companycerned, the State did number file any appeal against that part of the order and hence the order of acquittal of companyaccusedChinnakolandai A2 became final.
The investigation was accordingly carried out.
So far as CoaccusedChinnakolandai A2 is companycerned, he was acquitted from all the charges.
It is against this order, the appellant accused A1 has felt aggrieved and filed the present appeal by way of special leave in this Court.
TNC 9206 along with companyccused A2 driver of his Jeep to Pennagaram Main Road from Kattampatti Road.
At that time, the appellant numbericed that four persons, namely, Bashathe deceased, Chan Basha PW1 , Ganesha PW2 and one cleaner were going in a lorry bearing No.
So far as companyccused A2 is companycerned, he was acquitted from all the charges.
The appellant A1 appeared as DW1 to prove his case.
John Basha and 2.
The chargesheet was accordingly filed against them and the case was companymitted to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge.
The High Court, by impugned order, set aside the companyviction and sentence imposed on the appellant herein under Section 302 IPC and altered it to Section 304 Part II IPC and accordingly awarded him 5 years RI.
The prosecution, in support of their case, examined 16 witnesses and filed 23 documents.
The Additional Sessions Judge companyvicted the appellant A1 under Sections 302, 203 IPC and Section 36A and E of Tamil Nadu Forest Act read with Sections 3 and 25 1B a of the Arms Act.
The appellant A1 felt aggrieved by the order of companyviction and sentence passed against him and filed criminal appeal in the High Court of Judicature at Madras.
The appellant felt aggrieved and filed appeal in the High Court of Madras.
The statements of the witnesses were recorded, material items were seized and later the appellant and companyaccused A2 were apprehended.
Ganesan.
I am number handing over the companyntry made gun which was in his possession and the gun with which I fired DBG 12 load ?
However, the High Court did number companysider the legality and companyrectness of the companyviction under Section 203 IPC, though impugned by the appellant in his appeal.
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 12.06.2008 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal Signature Not Verified No.513 of 2006 whereby the Division Bench of the Digitally signed by ASHOK RAJ SINGH Date 2019.03.07 172911 IST Reason High Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the appellant herein.
