1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM CRL.R.C.(MD)No.96 of 2011 K.Kuttimani S/o.Kumbakarnan Kuppazhagiri Thottam, Thirumalapuram, Bodinayackanur Theni District. : Petitioner/Defacto Complainant Vs. 1.S.Mardhu @ Marudhupandian S/o.Selvaraj Vinobhaji colony Bodinayackanur Theni District. 2.C.Kandhi S/o.Chidambara Thevar Vinobhaji Colony Bodinayackanur Theni District. 3.S.Karthick S/o.Subramani JK Patti Bodinayackanur Theni District 4.State through the Inspector of Police Bodi Town Police Station, Theni District. : Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C., as against the order dated 17.09.2007 in C.C.No.146 of 2007 passed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Bodinayackanur. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Chandran For Respondent-4 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Respondent 3 : M.Ajmal Khan Respondent 1 & 2 : M.Natarajan O R D E R The Revision Petitioner/de-facto complainant, who suffered grievous injuries, has now chosen to withdraw the Criminal Revision Petition in view of the compromise entered into with the accused party, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 where under a sum of Rs.1,05,000/- stands paid to him by the third respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made necessary endorsement. Accordingly, the Revision Petition shall stand dismissed as withdrawn. However, we are unable to allow the matter to rest there. 2. The prosecution case was that the Revision Petitioner/de-facto complainant was set upon by three accused at about 8.15 p.m. on 18.04.2007 and he suffered several injuries. A case was registered in Crime No.276 of 2007 on the file of the fourth respondent. A charge sheet was filed before the lower Court informing the commission of offence under Sections 341 and 344 IPC by the first and third accused and under Sections 341 and 323 IPC by the second accused. The accused pleaded guilty and the lower Court passed a flea-bite sentence. A fine of Rs.100/- in default one weeks simple imprisonment on the respondents 1 and 2/accused 1 and 2 for offence under Sec.341 IPC. A fine of Rs.1,000/- for offence under Section 324 IPC was imposed on the first respondent/first accused, in default, one month simple imprisonment. A fine of Rs.600/- for offence under Section 323 IPC was imposed on the second respondent/second accused, in default, two weeks simple imprisonment. Even though the lower Court found the third accused/third respondent guilty under Sections 341 and 324 IPC, if afforded him the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act, considering the nature of offence and his being a student. Against such findings, the present Revision was filed by the de-facto complainant/revision petitioner. 3. Fortunately, the Revision Petitioner has appeared before this Court and we were able to see that the nature of injury suffered by him has deprived him of use of his left hand. Along with the revision papers, we find a copy of the discharge summary issued by the Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai in respect of the revision petitioner. Concerned, we have called for the records from the lower Court and sought an explanation from the investigating officer. The original wound certificate forms part of the records and it reflects the sufferance of grievous injuries. The explanation offered by the Investigating Officer is startling. She would state that she had prepared a charge sheet informing the sufferance of grievous injury and indicated appropriate sections of Indian Penal Code, but that the same has been tampered with. With the aid of the learned Public Prosecutor, we were able to ascertain that the allegation made by the Investigating Officer is not totally un- substantiated. 4. On perusal of the original charge sheet filed before the lower Court, we find that a whitener has been used and over the words which originally were written, the word 'rhjhuz' has been superimposed. Again we find that whitener has been used and instead of '325', the words ',jr' have been written. The paper used is porous enough to reflect the number '325' below ',jr'. The charge sheet is a two side affair and this Court has underlined the offending portion by use of pencil. It is the contention of the Investigating Officer that a Constable by name Rengasamy, now a Special Sub Inspector of Police, was entrusted with the task of forwarding the charge sheet to the Court and this kind of fraud upon Court must be his handy-work. Along with a copy of this order, the original charge sheet, original wound certificate of the revision petitioner and one set of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 entire revision papers shall be forwarded to the Superintendent of Police, Theni District, for appropriate action. The investigation/action taken pursuant to this order shall be informed at the earliest. A copy of this order shall be placed before the Registrar (Judicial) attached to this Bench for follow up from time to time. If need arises, the Learned Registrar may obtain further directions from this Court. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (P&A) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Theni District. 2.The Inspector of Police Bodi Town Police Station, Theni District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 4.The Registrar (Judicial) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai. 5. The Superintendent of Police, Theni District. Copy to : The Section Officer, Crl. Section (Records) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Encl : (With Original Charge Sheet, Original Wound Certificate of the petitioner and one set of entire revision Papers) RR SR : 14.03.2011 : 3p/6c CRL.R.C.(MD)No.96 of 2011 28.01.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/