Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 3026 (MAD)

Prasanth v. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Othakadai Police Station, Madurai

2014-09-02

N.KIRUBAKARAN

body2014
Judgment 1. The petitioner has been charged for the offences under Sections 147, 341, 323 IPC and Section 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and 3(1)(r) and (s) of SC/ST Act Amendment Ordinance Act, 2014. 2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the respondent. 3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that all the accused were arrested except this petitioner and therefore, he opposed this petition. 4. A perusal of the F.I.R would show that there is no overt act by the petitioner even though subsequently confession statement obtained from the accused. 5. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is studying in Second year B.Sc, his future will be spoiled, this Court is inclined to give a direction as prayed for, provided that the petitioner filed an affidavit that he will not indulge in any such activities in future. The said affidavit is filed before this Court and taken on file. 6. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner orally seeks to amend the name of the Court as it has been wrongly given as the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge/Madurai (PCR Court). Whereas, it should be Mahila Court, Madurai. 7. In view of the oral submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, the amendment is ordered. 8. With the above direction, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed.