High Court · 2025

CRL.MP(MD) No. 10714 of 2024BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.08.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRAANDTHE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R. POORNIMACRL.MP(MD) No. 10714 of 2024inCrl.A(MD)No.676 of 2024Selvakumar...Petitioner /AppellantVs.State rep. byThe Inspector of PoliceAviyur Police Station,Virudhunagar District.(Crime No.27 of 2018) ...... Respondent/ RespondentPrayer : Petition filed under Section 430 (1) of BNSS to suspend the sentence ofimprisonment imposed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge,Virudhunagar, in S.C.No.84 of 2019 dated 12.07.2024 and enlarge thepetitioner/appellant on bail, pending disposal of the Criminal Appeal.For Petitioner: Mr.R.Pon KarthikeyanFor Respondent: Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.MP(MD) No. 10714 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/A1 by theAdditional District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar, vide Judgment dated12.07.2024 in S.C.No.84 of 2019 he has filed this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition.2. The petitioner stands convicted and sentenced as under:Section of LawSentence ofimprisonment Fine amount302 r/w. 34 IPCTo undergo lifeimprisonment Rs.1,000/- i/d to under gosix months rigorousimprisonment364 IPCTo undergo 10 yearsrigorousimprisonment Rs.1,000/- i/d to under gosix months rigorousimprisonment3. The deceased was residing in K.Veppankulam, Kamuthi Taluk. PW8 isthe daughter and PW10 is the son of deceased. The case of the prosecution is thatthe deceased used to lend money to nearby villagers. Among those who hadborrowed money from him were Al and A2, who were unable to repay the saidamount. It is alleged that the deceased had abused them on account of the non-2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.MP(MD) No. 10714 of 2024repayment, thereby causing quarrel and enmity. Al and A2 planned to do away thedeceased. They sought help of A3 who is the nephew of Al. On 10.02.2018 at about11.00 p.m., A1 to A3 hatching a conspiracy to kill the deceased. On 14.02.2018 Alcalled deceased and stated that A2 has arranged money from his sister and hewould return it. Then Al asked the deceased to come to K. Karisalkulam. Thedeceased believing this, left his home after informing his daughter/ PW8 andgrandson/ PW27 that he was going to meet someone to collect money owed to him.Thereafter, the deceased met A1 to A3 at K.Karisalkulam junction and they alltravelled together to Kariyapatti, consuming liquor on the way. They took anautorickshaw from Kariyapatti bus stand to Nasar Puliyankulam, and from therewalked to the eastern side of K.Alangulam tank and after consuming food andliquor, Al and A2 strangled him using a towel and thereafter crushed his head witha stone, resulting in his death. Subsequently, A2 is said to have the deceased's goldchain and ring. Thereafter, A1, A3 and A4 allegedly purchased diesel and poured itover the deceased's body and set ablaze at the place of occurrence to destroyevidence. The burnt body was found the next day by a passerby and reported to theauthority. Hence, the respondent police has registered a case in Crime No.27 of 2018for the offence under Sections 201 and 302 IPC. 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.MP(MD) No. 10714 of 20244. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that itis a case of circumstantial evidence. The prosecution has failed to prove the chain ofcircumstances to fix the accused in the crime. The body of the deceased was said tohave been seen by P.W.3 on 16.02.2018 at about 11.30 a.m., and on his instructions,P.W.1 Village Administrative Officer is said to have given the complaint to therespondent on the same day. After five months, the respondent police has examinedP.W.16, an auto driver to the effect that he has last seen the accused along with thedeceased i.e., on 15.02.2018 at about 12.30 p.m. The trial Court failed to take intoconsideration the long gap between 12.30 p.m., (afternoon) on the previous day andthe body was found on the next day at about 11.30 p.m., and further even as perP.W.8 the daughter of the deceased, the deceased was having criminal case againsthim including murder and that he was also leading a wayward life and he washaving several other enemies and he would submit that without the chain ofcircumstances having been proved, the trial Court has convicted the petitioner. Hewould further submit that the occurrence had happened in the year 2018 and thepetitioner was on bail during trial and he has not violated the liberty granted to himduring his bail and after conviction only the petitioner is in prison. He would alsosubmit that there are several other arguable points in this case and therefore, heprayed for suspension of sentence.4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.MP(MD) No. 10714 of 20245. The respondent has filed a counter. The learned Additional PublicProsecutor would submit that the deceased is a moneylender. The accused haveborrowed money from him and in the guise of returning the money, they havecalled the deceased and they have committed the murder and thereafter, they havetaken the jewels worn by him and to screen the evidence they have also poureddiesel on the body of the deceased and set the body on fire. He would furthersubmit that the respondent police has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt andthe trial Court has rightly convicted the accused and thereby he would vehementlyopposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.6. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materialsavailable on record.7. It is an application of suspension of sentence. We would not proposeto delve deep into the evidence at this stage. Having gone through the records, weare of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of suspension of sentence to thepetitioner.8. Accordingly, the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.MP(MD) No. 10714 of 2024substantive 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 a bond forRs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum tothe satisfaction of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge,Virudhunagar.ii. The sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression inthe surety bond and the Trial Court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card orBank passbook to ensure their identity.iii. The petitioner shall stay at Nagapattinam and report before the Inspectorof Police, Nagapattinam Town Police Station, daily at 10.30 a.m., until furtherorders.iv. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdictionallimits of the respondent Police Station until further orders. sd/- 12/08/2025 / TRUE COPY / /08/2025 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. 10714 of 2024RMTO1. THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, VIRUDHUNAGAR.2.THE SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL PRISON,MADURAI.3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICEAVIYUR POLICE STATION,VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT.COPY TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NAGAPATTINAM TOWN POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM.+1. C.C. to R.PON KARTHIKEYAN Advocate SR.No.8728 (I) DT.12/08/2025 ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) No.10714 of 2024INCRL A(MD) No.676 of 2024 Date :12/08/2025NM/13.08.2025/ 7P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 7/7