Madrasdated High Court · 2025

Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, sentenced to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 of IPC sentenced to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, sentenced to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment and the period of remand already undergone by the appellant is ordered to be set off in the period of sentence under Section 428 of Cr.P.C and the sentence to run concurrently.Prayer in Crl.A.No.516 of 2021:This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C against the conviction and sentence imposed upon Appellant by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur in S.C.No.7 of 2019 dated 21.10.2021 for the offences under Section 307 r/w. 109 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 4 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, sentenced to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment and the period of remand already undergone by the appellant is ordered to be set off in the period of sentence under Section 428 of Cr.P.C.For Appellant in Crl.A.No.546 of 2021:Mr.M.GovindarajuFor Appellant in Crl.A.No.516 of 2021:Mr.SwamisubramanianFor Respondent in both Crl.As:Mr.A.Damodaran,Addl. Public ProsecutorAssisted byMs.M.Arifa Thasneem2/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021COMMON JUDGMENTThe Criminal Appeal No.546 of 2021 has been preferred by the Appellant/Accused No.1 challenging the Judgment dated 21.10.2021 in S.C.No.7 of 2019 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur convicting him under Sections 307 & 302 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment for the offences under Section 307 of IPC and also, sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 of IPC.2. The Criminal Appeal No.516 of 2021 has been preferred by the Appellant/Accused No.2 challenging the Judgment dated 21.10.2021 in S.C.No.7 of 2019 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur convicting him under Sections 307 r/w. 109 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo 4 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment.3/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 20213. Since these Criminal Appeals have arisen out of a same judgment, the these Criminal Appeals are disposed of by way of this common judgment. 4. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:Accused No.1 (Appellant in Crl.A.No.546 of 2021), Accused No.2 (Appellant in Crl.A.No.516 of 2021) and deceased Rajeshkannan are close relatives and they are residents of Selvapuram Village, Nannilam Taluk, Thiruvarur District. On 14.01.2018, at about 9.00 p.m., there was a wordy quarrel between Accused No.2 and P.W.1 (Maheswaran) with regard to stocking the sand in front of the house of P.W.11 (Sekar). One Mr.Rajeshkannan (deceased) who was residing near that place came there to pacify both Accused No.2 and P.W.1 (Maheswaran). At that time, Accused No.1 came there with an iron knife and he was trying to assault P.W.1 (Maheswaran), but, P.W.1 (Maheswaran) had moved away and escaped from that deadly assault. At that time, Accused No.1 stabbed Rajeshkannan (deceased) in his stomach by using the said knife and caused fatal injury to Rajeshkannan (deceased), due to which, Rajeshkannan (deceased) had fell 4/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021down and his intestine had collapsed. Therefore, immediately, Rajeshkannan (deceased) was taken to Thiruvarur Government Medical College Hospital for treatment. The said occurrence was witnessed by P.W.1 (Maheswaran), P.W.2 (Marimuthu), P.W.3 (Murali), P.W.5 (Karunanithi), P.W.9 (Ramu) and P.W.10 (Anbuselvan).5. On 14.01.2018, at around 10.00 p.m., Rajeshkannan (deceased) was admitted in Thiruvarur Government Medical College Hospital for treatment. P.W.13 (Dr.Gokulakrishnan, Assistant Lecturer in Thiruvarur Government Medical College Hospital) who was working in the Emergency Ward had examined Rajeshkannan (deceased). At that time, P.W.13 enquired Rajeshkannan (deceased) about the injury caused to him, to which, Rajeshkannan (deceased) replied that he was stabbed by a known person. Thereafter, P.W.13 recommended Rajeshkannan (deceased) for surgery. In the Accident Register (Ex.P8), P.W.13 had recorded that abdominal part was exposed and the injury was a stab injury. 6. On 15.01.2018, P.W.16 (Ms.Suganya, then Sub-Inspector of Police, Nannilam Police Station) came to the Hospital where Rajeshkannan 5/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021(deceased) was taking treatment and enquired him. On the said date, at around 2.30 a.m., Rajeshkannan (deceased) had given a Complaint Statement (Ex.P1) to P.W.16. Based on the Complaint Statement (Ex.P1) given by Rajeshkannan (deceased), P.W.16 registered a case in Crime No.14 of 2018 against Accused No.1 for the offence under Sections 294(b) and 307 of IPC. 7. Thereafter, P.W.17 (Mr.Azhagudurai, then Inspector of Police, Nannilam Police Station) went to the scene of crime on 15.01.2018 at about 7.00 a.m and prepared Observation Mahazar (Ex.P2) and Rough Sketch (Ex.P15) in the presence of P.W.4 (Kalaiyarasan) and P.W.5 (Karunanidhi) and also, seized M.O.1 (Blood stained Dhoti), M.O.2 (Blood stained Towel), M.O.3 (Blood stained Earth) and M.O.4 (Ordinary Earth) under Seizure Mahazar (Ex.P4).8. On 15.01.2018, at about 3.00 p.m., P.W.17 had arrested Accused No.1 and recorded the Confession Statement of Accused No.1 (Ex.P16) in the presence of P.W.6 (Mohangandhi) and P.W.7 (Selvaraj). Based on the admitted portion of Confession Statement given by Accused No.1, P.W.17 6/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021had seized M.O.5 (Blood stained Iron Knife) under Seizure Mahazar (Ex.P6) and sent the Accused No.1 to judicial custody. 9. Thereafter, on 20.01.2018, at about 9.00 a.m., P.W.17 received the information from Thiruvarur Medical College Hospital that Rajeshkannan (deceased) who was taking treatment as inpatient had died at 6.55 a.m, pursuant to which, P.W.17 altered the section of crime from Sections 294(b) & 307 IPC to Section 294(b) & 302 IPC under Alteration Report (Ex.P19). On the very same day, P.W.17 had conducted inquest on the body of deceased Rajeshkannan in front of Panchayatars and prepared the Inquest Report (Ex.P20). Then, P.W.17 sent the body of deceased Rajeshkannan for postmortem. 10. On 20.01.2018 at about 01.45 p.m., P.W.14 (Dr.Sivakumar, Assistant Lecturer, Thiruvarur Government Medical College Hospital) had started the postmortem on the body of deceased Rajeshkannan and concluded the same by 3.00 p.m. After Postmortem, P.W.14 had issued Postmortem Certificate (Ex.P9) and Final Opinion (Ex.P10). The Postmortem Certificate (Ex.P9) issued by P.W.14 is extracted hereunder:7/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021“POSTMORTEM CERTIFICATEPM No.25/2018Dated: 20/01/2018Crime No. & Police Station : 14/2018, u/s. 294(b), 302 IPC of Nannilam P.S.Date and Hrs. of receipt of requisition : 20/01/2018 at 01.45 P.M from Inspector of Nannilam P.S.Body brought & identified by : P.Visvanathan, H.C.No.709 of Nannilam P.s.Date and Hour of Autopsy : 20/01/2018 at 02:00 P.M.P.M. examination concluded at : 03:00 P.M. on 20/01/2018SCHEDULE OF OBSERVATIONSA-GENERAL1. Name:RAJESHKANNAN, S/o. BALU2. Sex & Age:Male, 24 years3. Length:175 cm4. Physique & Nutrition:Well built and moderately nourished5. Identifying feature:1. A black mole over front of lower part of right side of the chest.2. A scar over front of right knee.6. External AppearancesA male body wrapped in white and blue color bed sheet and another white color vesti with green color border. Hospital bandage present over front of abdomen in midline. Wound dressing mesh with colostomy bag and drainage tube present over colostomy wound in left side of the abdomen. Scalp hair 3 cm, moustache 1 cm and beard 1 cm; black color hair. Eyes and mouth partly opened.7. Postmortem changesBody kept in cold storage. Postmortem hypostasis present over back of the body. Rigor mortis is present in muscles of lower limbs only. No signs of decomposition.Wounds: Ante Mortem: External:1.A sutured stab wound of 6 cm, wedge shaped, obliquely placed over lower abdomen in midline with 2 black thread sutures intact in middle of wound. Wound is altered in middle by surgical incised wound. A track is established over the front of the abdomen entering the muscles of the abdomen and peritoneum passing forwards and downwards in to the peritoneal cavity.2.Multiple abrasions of 5 to 10 x 0.1 to 0.2 cm over front of chest.8/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021Wounds: Ante Mortem: Internal:1.A sutured wound over entire circumference, with resection and end to end anastomosis of jejunum part of small intestine and over adjacent mesentry with sutures intact. On removal of the sutures the margins of wound are clear cut.2.A sutured wound of 6 cm, over caecum part of large intestine with sutures intact. On removal of the sutures the margins of wound are clear cut.Surgical wound:1.A sutured incised wound of 21 cm, over front of abdomen in midline with 12 black thread sutures intact. On removal of the sutures the wound is cavity deep with clear cut margins.2.Sutured penetrated (laprotomy) wound of 1 x 1 cm, cavity deep, circular shaped over front of lower part of right side of the abdomen with 1 black thread sutures intact. A track is established over the front of the abdomen entering the muscles of the abdomen and peritoneum passing forwards and downwards in to the peritoneal cavity.3.Penetrated (ileostomy) wound of 3 x 3 cm, cavity deep, over front of lower part of left side of the abdomen, with cut end of ileum exposed outside with sutures intact with drainage tube and colostomy bag.All the sutured, incised, penetrated or stab wounds sites contained blood clots. Abrasions are partly healed with black scab.All the above wounds are Ante Mortem in nature.B – HEAD AND NECK1.Scalp:Nil particular2.Skull:Nil paarticular3.Brain, meninges and Cerebral vessels:Oedematous;C/S multiple petechial haemorrhages in the white mater.4.Mouth, Tongue and Pharynx:Nil particular5.Neck, Larynx and Thyroid and other neck structures:Nil particularC – CHEST1.Ribs, Chest wall & Diaphragm:Vide wounds2.Mediastinum and Thymus:Nil particular9/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 20213.Oesophagus:Nil particular4.Trachea and Bronchi:Nil particular5.Pleural Cavities Right:No free fluidLeft:No free fluid6.LungsRight:Oedematous; C/S congestedLeft:Oedematous; C/S congested7.Heart and Pericardial Sac:Nil particular8.Large blood vessels:Nil particularD – ABDOMEN1.Abdominal Wall:Vide wounds2.Peritoneal Cavity:Vide wounds; Contains 50 mlof yellow color fluid with tinyblood clots.3.Stomach and its contents:Stomach contains 50 ml of colorless fluid.4.Small intestine:Vide wounds5.Large intestine:Vide wounds6.Liver & Gall Bladder:C/S congested7.Pancreas:Nil particular8.Spleen Wt.:C/S congested9.KidneysRight Wt.:C/S congestedLeft Wt.:C/S congested10.Adrenals:Nil particular11.Pelvic Walls:Nil particular12.Genital Organs:Nil particularE – SPINE1.Spinal Column and Spinal Cord:IntactF – ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS – NILG – TISSUES PRESERVED FOR FURTHER EXAMINATIONSViscera preserved for chemical analysis and blood for grouping sent to FSLOPINION AS TO THE TIME OF DEATHThe approximate time of death:Died on 20/01/2018 at 06:55 AMin Thiruvarur Govt. Medical College, Thiruvarur.The cause of death to the best of my knowledge and belief:Due to complications of StabWound of Abdomen.10/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021However, opinion reserved pending for report of chemical analysis of viscera.”11. In the Postmortem Certificate (Ex.P9) as well as Final Opinion (Ex.P9), P.W.14 had stated that Rajeshkannan (deceased) had died of complications due to stab wound of abdomen.12. P.W.15 (Mr.Ramachandran, Scientific Officer in Thanjavur District Forensic Science Laboratory) had examined the case material objects on 16.02.2018 and had issued Biological Report (Ex.P12) and Serological Report (Ex.P13). 13. On 22.01.2018, Accused No.2 had surrendered before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Nannilam, pursuant to which, Accused No.2 was sent to judicial custody. On 30.01.2018, P.W.17 recorded the Confession Statement of Accused No.2. Based on the Confession Statement of Accused No.2, P.W.17 altered the section of crime from Sections 294(b) & 302 IPC to Section 294(b), 302 & 109 IPC under Alteration Report (Ex.P21).11/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 202114. Since P.W.17 went on transfer, P.W.18 (Mr.Mahesh, then Inspector of Police, Nannilam Police Station) took the case in Crime No.14 of 2018 for investigation. After the completion of investigation, P.W.18 filed the Final Report against the accused.15. On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court has held that Accused No.1 is found guilty for commission of offence under Sections 307 & 302 of IPC and Accused No.2 is found guilty for commission of offence under Sections 307 r/w. 109 of IPC. Hence, the Trial Court vide Judgment dated 21.10.2021 in S.C.No.7 of 2019, convicted the accused and sentenced them as follows:Name of the Accused and Rank of the AccusedOffencePunishmentArivanantham (A1)Under Section 307 of IPCTo undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment.Under Section 302 of IPCTo undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment.Jeyasudha (A2)Under Section 307 r/w. 109 of IPCTo undergo 4 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment.12/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 202116. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, Accused No.1 has preferred Criminal Appeal No.546 of 2021 and Accused No.2 has preferred Criminal Appeal No.516 of 2021 before this Court.17. Mr.M.Govindaraju, learned counsel for Appellant in Crl.A.No.546 of 2021/Accused No.1 submitted that as per the evidence of P.W.17, on 15.01.2018 at 3.00 p.m., Accused No.1 was arrested near Aanaikuppam Bus Stop, whereas, the FIR in Crime No.17 of 2018 (Ex.D3) registered by P.W.16 reflects that on 14.01.2018, Accused No.1 was attacked by P.W.1, P.W.3 and deceased Rajeshkannan, due to which, Accused No.1 had sustained injuries and thus, he was taking treatment as inpatient in Thiruvarur Government Medical College Hospital and Ex.D3 also reflects that P.W.16 had received the complaint from Accused No.1 on 15.01.2018 at 9.30 p.m. This itself falsifies the evidence of P.W.17 and also, creates a doubt with regard to the genesis of occurrence. 17.1. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for Appellant in Crl.A.No.546 of 2021/Accused No.1 that the alleged occurrence took place 13/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021on 14.01.2018 (Pongal Festival Day) and at the time of occurrence, deceased Rajeshkannan was under the influence of alcohol which was evident from the deposition of P.W.13 & P.W.14, Medical Officers who were working at Thiruvarur Government Medical College Hospital. P.W.13 and P.W.14 had deposed in their evidence that there was the presence of alcohol on the body of deceased Rajeshkannan. 17.2. The learned counsel for Appellant in Crl.A.No.546 of 2021/Accused No.1 also submitted that Complaint Statement (Ex.P1) given by deceased Rajeshkannan cannot be accepted as an admissible evidence since the same was given by the deceased when he was taking treatment in the Hospital, but, the said Complaint Statement (Ex.P1) has been considered as dying declaration by the Trial Court. 17.3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for Appellant in Crl.A.No.546 of 2021/Accused No.1 that there was no previous enmity between Accused No.1 and deceased Rajeshkannan. The deceased Rajeshkannan had died due to single blow. Therefore, the offence committed by Accused No.1 would be punishable under Section 304 of IPC, 14/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021but, the same would not attract the penal provision of Section 302 of IPC.18. Mr.Swamisubramanian, learned counsel for Appellant in Crl.A.No.516 of 2021/Accused No.2 submitted that in the present case, eye witnesses have stated that Accused No.2 instigated Accused No.1 to kill P.W.1 and on instigation of Accused No.2, when Accused No.1 attempted to assault P.W.1, at that time, Accused No.1 stabbed Rajeshkannan (deceased) who came for compromising the quarrel between P.W.1 and Accused No.2. However, in Ex.P19, Alteration Report filed by P.W.17, nothing has been mentioned about the instigation of Accused No.2. Accused No.2 has been implicated in this case only after the death of deceased Rajeshkannan which itself shows that prosecution has made Accused No.2 as a scape goat only because of the pressure given by some political parties.18.1. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for Appellant in Crl.A.No.516 of 2021/Accused No.2 that without properly appreciating the evidence of witnesses, the Trial Court has held that Accused No.2 is found guilty under Section 307 r/w. 109 of IPC. The Trial Court has considered the Complaint Statement (Ex.P1) given by Rajeshkannan (deceased) as dying 15/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021declaration of the deceased. The Complaint Statement (Ex.P1) speaks only about the stab injury which was caused to Rajeshkannan (deceased) by Accused No.1 alone and the same does not speak about the instigation of Accused No.2. However, the Trial Court has erroneously held in its findings that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that Accused No.1 had stabbed the deceased with iron knife in his lower abdomen and caused his death and thereby, Accused No.1 had committed the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and also, the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that Accused No.1 had attempted to murder P.W.1 only on the instigation of Accused No.2 and thereby, Accused No.1 had committed the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC and Accused No.2 had abetted the commission of said offence is punishable under Section 307 r/w. 109 of IPC. 18.2. The learned counsel for Appellant in Crl.A.No.516 of 2021/Accused No.2 also submitted that as against Accused No.2, the Trial Court has initially confirmed the charge under Section 307 of IPC and later, confirmed the charge under Section 109 of IPC. The Trial Court has convicted the Accused No.2 under two Sections 307 & 109 of IPC which 16/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021itself is not proper.19. We have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for Accused No.1 as well as learned counsel for Accused No.2 and we have perused the materials available on record. 20. The evidence of eye witnesses viz., P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.5, P.W.9 and P.W.10 clearly reveals that on 14.01.2018, at about 9.00 p.m., there was a wordy quarrel between P.W.1 and Accused No.2 with regard to the stocking of sand in front of the house of P.W.11 (Sekar). While so, Rajeshkannan (deceased) who is no way connected to the said quarrel went to compromise the said quarrel. At that time, Accused No.1 caused injury on the vital part of the body of Rajeshkannan (deceased) with an iron knife which he kept in his hip, due to which, the intestine of Rajeshkannan (deceased) was protruded. Thereafter, immediately, Rajeshkannan (deceased) was taken to Thiruvarur Government Medical College Hospital for treatment. At the time of admission, P.W.13, Medical Officer enquired Rajeshkannan (deceased) about the injury caused to him, to which, Rajeshkannan (deceased) replied that he was stabbed by a known person. 17/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 202121. Upon receipt of information from the Hospital, P.W.16 went to the Hospital, where, Rajeshkannan (deceased) had given a Complaint Statement (Ex.P1) to P.W.16 stating Accused No.1 had caused a stab injury on his abdomen. Thereafter, on the basis of said Complaint Statement (Ex.P1), P.W.16 registered the FIR in Crime No.14 of 2018 under Section 294(b) and 307 of IPC against Accused No.1. Thereafter, Rajeshkannan (deceased) had died on 20.01.2018 i.e, 6 days after the date of occurrence.22. The evidence of P.W.13 clearly reveals that there was a stab injury on the vital part of the body of deceased Rajeshkannan. In the Postmortem Certificate (Ex.P9) and Final Opinion (Ex.P9), it has been stated by P.W.14 that Rajeshkannan (deceased) had died of complications due to stab wound of abdomen.23. However, it is evident from the deposition of eye witnesses that there was no actual quarrel between the deceased and A1 and the quarrel was only between P.W.1 and A2. When the deceased interfered to pacify them, 18/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021at that stage, he also received stab injury. The medical evidence and the evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.3 clearly indicates that P.W.1, deceased and A1, all were drunken at the time of occurrence and they were under the influence of alcohol. The postmortem report also clearly substantiates the fact that alcohol was detected in the viscera of the deceased. It is relevant to note that the entire occurrence took place in a drunken brawl. The statement given by the deceased (Ex.P1) clearly shows that only A1 caused injury. Though the statement recorded from the deceased is to be treated as dying declaration, the fact remains that there was no previous motive or enmity between the parties and only in a sudden quarrel between P.W.1 and A2 in a drunken brawl, when the deceased tried to pacify them, who was also in a drunken state, he received an injury. Therefore, it is clear that there is no intention to cause murder. Further, even after the occurrence, the deceased was conscious in the hospital and he died in the hospital only six days after the date of occurrence. The occurrence took place in the night hours and all of them were intoxicated and there was no intention to cause murder and there was no previous enmity between the accused and the deceased. The accused has also not taken any advantage or acted in an unusual manner, except causing single blow. Therefore, the act of the accused would certainly fall 19/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021only under Section 304(i) IPC and not under Section 300 IPC. 24. Therefore, we are inclined to modify the conviction of A1/appellant in Crl.A.No.546 of 2021 from Section 302 IPC to Section 304(i) IPC. Accordingly, the conviction of A1/appellant in Crl.A.546 of 2021 is modified from Section 302 IPC to Section 304(i) IPC and the sentence is reduced to seven years rigorous imprisonment. With the above modifications, Crl.A.No.546 of 2021 is partly allowed. Rest of the judgment of the trial Court qua A1 stands confirmed. 25. As far as A2/appellant in Crl.A.No.516 of 2021 is concerned, the very inclusion of A2 in the final report itself is on the basis of the agitation made by the public before the Government Hospital. This has been clearly spoken by P.W.17 in the cross-examination. It appears that there was a huge agitation by the public and the Investigating Officer also clearly admitted that there was agitation by one political party to include A2 as accused. Therefore, A2 has been implicated later. Further, the evidence of the eye-witnesses also do not indicate any overt act as against A2/appellant in Crl.A.No.516 of 2021. Therefore, we are of the view that A2 has to be 20/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021acquitted of all the charges. Accordingly, Crl.A.No.516 of 2021 is allowed and the judgment of conviction and sentence qua A2 is set aside. A2/appellant in Crl.A.No.516 of 2021 is acquitted of all the charges framed against her. Fine amount, if any, paid shall be refunded to her. Bail bond(s), if any, executed by A2 shall stand discharged.(N.S.K.,J.) (M.L.R., J.)17.11.2025 mrr/mkn Internet : YesIndex: Yes/NoNeutral Citation : YesSpeaking Order (or) Non-Speaking OrderTo1.The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur.2.The Inspector of Police, Nannilam Police Station, Thiruvarur District.3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Tiruchirappalli.4.The Superintendent, Central Prison for Women, Tiruchirappalli.21/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 20215.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 22/23 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 2021N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.andM.JOTHIRAMAN, J.mrr/mknCrl.A.Nos.546 & 516 of 202117.11.202523/23