S.Suresh v. State Rep.By

ORDER This criminal revision case has been filed against the judgment passed in CA.No.237 of 2018 dated 18.09.2019 on the file of III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Erode at Gobichettipalayam, thereby confirming the order of conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court in SC.No.118 of 2016 dated 18.06.2018 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Gobichettipalayam for the offence under Sections 450 and 307 of IPC.

¶2The petitioner is the accused in the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant and the same was registered in crime No.385 of 2016 for the offence punishable under Sections 450 & 307 of IPC alleging that on 16.10.2015 at about 2.15 am, the accused with an intention to cause death of PW3, trespassed the house of PW3 and attacked him with a grinding stone covered with pillow. Therefore, PW3 sustained grievous injuries on his face and neck. Immediately, he was taken to hospital for treatment. After completion of investigation, the respondent filed final report and the same was taken cognizance by the trial court for the offence punishable under Sections 450 & 307 of IPC.

¶3In order to bring the charges to home, the prosecution had examined PW1 to PW20 and marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P22. The prosecution produced material objects as MO.1 to MO.7. On the side of the accused, no one was examined and no documents were marked to disprove the charge.

¶4On perusal of oral and documentary evidences, the trial court found the petitioner guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 450 & 307 of IPC and he was sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo one year simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 450 of IPC and he was sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo one year simple imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred appeal and the same was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the present criminal revision case has been filed by the accused.

¶5While pending this criminal revision case, the petitioner and PW3 entered into compromise and also executed undertaking deed dated

16.03.2026, which shall form part and parcel of this order, the relevant portion of which is extracted hereunder 16/03/2026?k;njjp. <nuhL khtl;lk;. nfhgpbrl;oghisak; jhYf;fh. e";irg;g[spak;gl;o fpuhkk;. g[spak;gl;o. f!;gh f/vz;/104-125?y; FoapUf;Fk; Rg;igad; kfd; 47 taJs;s v!;/Rnuஷ; (Mjhh; vz;/8516 7705 8979) Mfpa c';fSf;F. <nuhL khtl;lk;. nfhgpbrl;oghisak; jhYf;fh. e";irg;g[spak;gl;o fpuhkk;. g[spak;gl;o. f!;gh f/vz;/104-105? y; FoapUf;Fk; ehfuh$; kfd; 53 taJs;s e/bgUkhs; (Mjhh; vz;/3341 6032 1697) Mfpa ehd; vGjpf; bfhLf;Fk; cWjpbkhHp Mtzk; vd;dbtd;why;. eP';fs; vdf;F mj;ij kfd; MtPh;fs;/ ekf;Fs; jfuhW Vw;gl;L mjd; fhuzkhf c';fs; kPJ g';fhsg[J}h; fhty; epiyaj;jpy; Fw;w vz;/385-2015?y; gphpt[ 307 IPC apd;go tHf;F jhf;fy; bra;ag;gl;L SC.No.118-2016?y; nfhgpbrl;oghisak; ADJ Court-y; rpiw jz;lid tpjpf;fg;gl;lJ/ mjd;nghpy; eP';fs; brd;id cah;ePjpkd;wj;jpy; Crl.RC.No. 1482-2019 jhf;fy; bra;J epYitapy; cs;sJ/ nkw;go tHf;F rk;ke;jkhf ek; ,UtUf;Fk; ntz;oa egh;fs; igNy; ngrpajd; mog;gilapy; vdJ t';fpahd ghisak; t';fp fzf;F vd;/31425405835?y; 09/03/2026?k; njjpay; U:/5.00.000-? (U:gha; Ie;J yl;rk; kl;Lk; bgw;Wf;bfhz;nld; vd;gij rhl;rpfs; Kd;dpiyapy; Twp ,jpy; ifbahg;gk; bra;fpnwd;/

¶6Accordingly, the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- in favour of PW3. PW3 appeared before this Court through video conference from the respondent police station and he deposed that he has no objection to set aside the impugned judgment. PW3 was identified by the respondent herein. Mr.D.Muralidharan, Inspector and Mr.P.Gurusamy, Special Sub Inspector also appeared before this Court. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has issued guidelines in the case reported in 2017 9 SCC 641-(Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbathbhai Vs. State of Gujrath), for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceedings. Considering the same and also the undertaking deed entered into between the parties, this Court is inclined to reduce the sentence alone by modifying the impugned judgments.

¶7Accordingly, the order of conviction for the offence under Sections 450 & 307 of IPC is hereby confirmed. Insofar as the sentence is concerned, the same is reduced to the period of sentence already undergone by the petitioner. The remaining orders of the impugned judgments shall remain intact. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to be set at liberty forthwith.

¶8With the above modification, this criminal revision case stands partly allowed.

17.03.2026 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order lok

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. lok To

1.Assistant Sessions Judge, Gobichettipalayam

2.III Additional District and Sessions Judge of Gobichettipalayam at Erode District

17.03.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.03.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN S.Suresh ... Petitioner Vs. State Rep. By, Inspector of Police, Bangalapudur Police Station,, In Crime No.385/2015, Erode District ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. to pass an order to set aside the judgment and conviction passed in SC.No.118 of 2016 dated 18.06.2018 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Gobichettipalayam and confirmed by III Additional District and Sessions Judge of Gobichettipalayam at Erode District in CA.No.237 of 2018 dated 18.09.2019 and allowing the criminal revision petition throughout by acquitting the revision petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Shunmugavelayutham, Senior Counsel for Mr.B.Mohan For Respondent : Mr.L.Baskaran, Government Advocate(crl.side)