1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.03.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN Criminal Appeal (MD) No.17 of 2011 Susai Mariyan . . . Appellant/Single Accused Vs. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Samayanallur Police Station, Madurai District. (In Crime No.275 of 1999) . . . Respondent/Complainant Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure code, praying to set aside the conviction and sentences imposed by the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.III, Madurai in S.C.No.158 of 1999 dated 14.07.2003 against the appellant. For Appellant : Mr.M.Anandakumar For Respondent : Mr.P.Rajendran Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ORDER The appellant is the sole accused and was charged for the commission of the offence under Section 392 read with 394 of Indian Penal Code with regard to the alleged incident that took place at about 7.30 P.M. on 16.06.1998 The appellant/ accused pleaded not guilty to the said charges. 2. During the course of trial, the prosecution in order to sustain their case examined P.Ws.1 to 13 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.10. The accused was questioned under Section 313(1)(b) of Criminal Procedure Code with regard to the incriminating circumstances made against him and he denied the same as false. On behalf of the accused no oral evidence was let in and documents were marked. 3. The Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.III, Madurai, on consideration of oral and documentary evidence found the accused guilty under Section 392 read with 394 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo Rigourous Imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- with default sentence of simple imprisonment for one year vide judgment dated 14.07.2003 and challenging the vires of the same, the present Criminal Appeal is preferred. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused on instruction would submit that during the pendency of the appeal, the appellant/ accused was not enlarged on bail and infact he undergone the entire period of incarceration and that the fine amount has already been paid at the time of preferring appeal. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/accused has also drawn the attention of this Court to the impugned judgment, wherein the trial Court has not ordered set off and hence, prays for the said relief. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 5. On the said submissions, this Court heard Mr.P.Rajendran, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side). 6. This Court taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant is of the view that since the appellant/accused had already undergone the entire period of incarceration as awarded by the trial Court vide impugned judgment dated 14.07.2003 and he pleaded only for set off, is of the view that nothing survives for adjudication. Therefore, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed. 7. Since the trial Court has not awarded set off, this Court is of the view that the benefit of set off can be granted to the appellant/accused The period of incarceration undergone by the appellant/accused during the investigation and trial of the case is ordered to be set of in terms of Section 428 of Criminal Procedure Code. 8. In the result, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed. However, the period of incarceration undergone by the accused during the investigation and trial of the case is ordered to be set off in terms of Section 428 of Cr.P.C Since the appellant/accused had already undergone the period of incarceration, he is ordered to be set forth at liberty forthwith unless his detention/custody is required in connection with any other proceedings/ cases. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.III,Madurai. 2.Do-Thro' The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Madurai. 3.The Inspector of Police,Samayanallur Police Station, Madurai District. 4.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem. 5.The District Collector, Salem. 6.The Director General of Police,Chennai – 4. 7.The Judicial Magistrate No.V, Madurai. 8.Do-Thro' The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai. 9.The Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Order in Criminal Appeal (MD) No.17 of 2011 28.03.2011 sj PA/01.04.2011/2P/10C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/