High Court · 2025

CRL MP(MD) No. 8274 of 2024BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.07.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRAANDTHE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R. POORNIMACRL MP(MD) No. 8274 of 2024inCrl.A(MD)No.671 of 2024Karuppasamy.......Petitioner /AppellantVsState represented byThe Inspector of Police,Kadambur Police Station,Thoothukudi District.(In Crime No.7 of 2019)...... Respondent/RespondentPrayer: Petition filed under Section 430(2) of BNSS to suspend the sentence imposedon the petitioner in the judgment dated 24.06.2024 made in S.C.NO.137 of 2019, onthe file of I Additional District and Sessions Court, Thoothukudi and enlarge thepetitioner on bail pending disposal of the Criminal Appeal.For Petitioner: Mr.A.JayaramachandranFor Respondent: Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL MP(MD) No. 8274 of 2024O R D E R[Order of the Court was made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.]Seeking to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the AdditionalDistrict and Sessions Court, Thoothukudi, vide Judgment dated 24.06.2024 inS.C.No.137 of 2019, he has filed this criminal miscellaneous petition.2. The petitioner stands convicted and sentenced as under:Section of LawSentence ofimprisonment Fine amount449 I.P.C.,To undergo theimprisonment for lifeRs.5,000/- i/d to under gosix months simpleimprisonment302 I.P.C.,To undergo theimprisonment for life Rs.5,000/- i/d to under gosix months simpleimprisonment3. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Annadurai, his wife and hisdaughter-in-law viz., Premalatha were living in Melaparaipatti. The accused 1 andone Harikrishnan, son of the deceased were friends. Therefore, the first accusedused to visit the house of the said Harikrishnan. About 1 ½ years ago, the said2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL MP(MD) No. 8274 of 2024Harikrishnan went abroad for job. The daughter-in-law and the deceasedAnnadurai went to Kadambur police station on 17.09.2018 and lodged a complaintalleging that the first accused went to the house of the said Harikrishanan and triedto misbehave with the said Premalatha, on the basis of which F.I.R., in CrimeNo.126/2018 was registered for the offences under Sections 294(b), 352, 354 and 506(ii) I.P.C., and the first accused was remanded to judicial custody. Having beenreleased on bail, the first accused continued to harass the said Premalatha, due towhich the said Premalatha went to her relative's house at Tirunelveli. The firstaccused enraged by the act of the said Annadurai in sending him to the jail and withan intention to murder Annadurai, on 04.02.2019 about 07.00p.m, the first accusedalong with the accused Nos.2 and 3 went to Malaparaipatti in a two wheeler and leftthe two wheeler in the forest area and trespassed into the house of the saidAnnadurai and all the accused assaulted the said Annadurai with Aruval on hisneck and cheek and due to which, the deceased sustained grievous injuries andsuccumbed. Hence, the case.4. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that theappellant/petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.3 in this case and the trial Courtfailed to take into consideration several contradictions and discrepancies in the3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL MP(MD) No. 8274 of 2024prosecution case. Though P.W.1, P.W.4 to P.W.6 and P.W.8 are projected as eye-witnesses to the occurrence, other than P.W.1, all the witnesses have not supportedthe case of the prosecution and they have turned as hostile and in suchcircumstances, the evidence of P.W.1 should have been appreciated with great careand in this case the alleged occurrence is said to have been taken place at 07.00p.m.,and Ex.P.1 – complaint was said to be given to the police station at 09.00p.m.. 5. The learned Counsel would further submit that it is admitted in theevidence of P.W.1 that she had seen all the accused at the police station when shehad gone to lodge the complaint and she had identified them there, that thereby theentire evidence of the prosecution with regard to the arrest, confession and recoverybecomes doubtful. Further P.W.3 – brother of the deceased had spoken about thepresence of the petitioner and had seen only the first accused running out the houseof the deceased with aruval. He would further submit that the petitioner was onbail during trial and that there are several arguable points in this case and theappeal is of the year 2024 and the likelihood of the appeal being taken up for finalhearing in the near future is also not possible and therefore, he prayed forsuspension of sentence.4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL MP(MD) No. 8274 of 20246. The respondent has filed a detailed counter. The learned Additional PublicProsecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that it is the case where thepetitioner along with other accused had trespassed into house of the deceased andcommitted brutal murder of the husband of P.W.1, that the evidence of P.W.1 isclear and cogent and the trial Court rightly taking into consideration of oral anddocumentary evidences, has convicted the accused and thereby he wouldvehemently oppose for grant of bail to the petitioner.7. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials availableon record.8. It is an application of suspension of sentence. We would not propose todelve deep into the evidence at this stage. Having gone through the records, we areof the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of suspension of sentence to the petitioner.9. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and thesubstantive sentence of imprisonment alone imposed on the petitioner herein issuspended, subject to the following conditions:i. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on executing a5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL MP(MD) No. 8274 of 2024bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with twosureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned IAdditional District and Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi.ii. The sureties shall affix their photographs and Left ThumbImpression in the surety bond and the Trial Court may obtain acopy of their Aadhar card or Bank passbook to ensure theiridentity.iii. The petitioner shall stay at Villupuram and report before theInspector of Police, Town Police Station, daily at 10.30 a.m., untilfurther orders.iv.It is made clear that the petitioner shall not enter into thejurisdictional limits of the respondent Police Station until furtherorders. sd/- 08/07/2025 / TRUE COPY // /07/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL MP(MD) No. 8274 of 2024SSLTO1 THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT,THOOTHUKUDI.2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KADAMBUR POLICE STATION,THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.3 THE SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL PRISON,PALAYAMKOTTAI.4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI.COPY TO THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,VILLUPURAM TOWN POLICE STATION,VILLUPURAM.+1. C.C. to M/S. JAYARAMACHANDRAN.A Advocate SR.No.7284 (I)DT.09/07/2025 ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) No.8274 of 2024IN CRL.A(MD)No.671 of 2024 Date :08/07/2025NM/11.07.2025/ 7P/7C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 7/7