CRL A No. 455 of 2018 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 29-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR CRL A No. 455 of 2018 S.Rajalakshmi ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. S.H.O.Kurinchipadi P.S Kurinchipadi. 2. Arumugam 3. Sumathi ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: This criminal appeal filed under Section 372(4) Cr.P.C. to set aside the order dated 14.09.2017 passed by the Mahila Session Court at Cuddalore in S.C.No.95 of 2016. For Appellant(s): Ms.P. PARVATHI FOR M/S.M.MANIVASAGAM ASSOCIATES For Respondent(s): Mrs. SHARADA VIVEK Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (CRL. SIDE) FOR R1. Mr.K.M.SUBHERAMANIAM FOR R2 & R3 - NO APPEARANCE JUDGMENT This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant/defacto complainant aggrieved against the judgment dated 14.09.2017 rendered in SC.No.95 of 2016. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL A No. 455 of 2018 __________ Page2 of 4 2.The appellant/defacto complainant, on whose complaint, case has been registered in crime No.228 of 2013 for offences under Sections 417, 506(ii) IPC and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Women Harassment Act. 3.The learned counsel for the appellant/defacto complainant submitted that on conclusion of investigation, charge sheet filed in S.C.No.95 of 2016. During trial, the appellant/defacto complainant examined as PW1 and nine other witnesses PW1 to PW10 examined. Ex.P1 to Ex.P8 marked but the trial Court, on conclusion of trial, acquitted the respondents 2 & 3/accused, against which, present criminal appeal. 4.The learned counsel for the appellant/defacto complainant fairly submitted that challenging the judgement in S.C.No.95 of 2016, two appeals preferred, one is State and another one is appellant/defacto complainant for the same prayer. The appeal in Crl.A.No.219 of 2018 preferred by State was dismissed by judgment dated 26.09.2022 and produced the copy of the judgment. 5.The learned counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Crl.Side) submitted that the appeal preferred by the State in Crl.A.No.219 of 2018 was dismissed by judgment dated 26.09.2022. Now, for the same prayer, this appeal preferred and the same is pending. Hence, nothing survives for adjudication in this appeal. Hence, this appeal ought to be dismissed. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL A No. 455 of 2018 __________ Page3 of 4 6. Since both the appeals, namely, Crl.A.No.219 of 2018 preferred by the State and Crl.A.No.455 of 2018 preferred by the appellant/defacto complainant arise out of the same judgment passed in S.C.No.95 of 2016, this Court, by a judgement dated 26.09.2022 considered the submissions, re-appreciated the entire evidence and materials available on record, found no infirmity in the judgment of the trial Court and consequently, confirmed the same by dismissing appeal preferred by State. 7.In view of the above, as the judgment of the trial Court has already been confirmed by this Court order dated 26.09.2022, nothing survives for further consideration in the present appeal preferred by the appellant/defacto complainant. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is dismissed. 29-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No sms To 1. S.H.O.Kurinchipadi P.S Kurinchipadi. 2. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL A No. 455 of 2018 __________ Page4 of 4 M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J. sms CRL A No. 455 of 2018 29-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis