Chinnapaiyan v. The State, the Inspector of Police,

ORDER (Order of the Court was delivered by N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.) This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the learned Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri, on 29.09.2022 in S.C.No.13 of 2021 and release him on bail.

¶2The learned Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri in S.C.No.13 of 2021, has convicted the petitioner and sentenced him as follows:- Offence Sentence imposed U/s.302 IPC Life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to undergo R.I. for two years.

¶3Challenging the above conviction and sentence, the petitioner has filed the above Criminal Appeal and he seeks suspension of sentence and bail in the present miscellaneous petition.

¶4Heard Mr.P.M.Basil, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Raja Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent/Police.

¶5It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner is the father who had committed murder of his own son. The deceased was the accused son, on the date of occurrence the petitioner accused due to property dispute assaulted the deceased with a reaper wood, due to which the deceased died on the spot. P.W.1 and PW2 are the eye witnesses to the occurrence who are none other than the wife and the mother of the deceased. They have supported the prosecution case.

¶6The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the deceased is the son of the accused. He had many bad antecedents, he created nuisance to the entire family members. On the date of occurrence, there was a property dispute, the deceased wanted his share and fought with his father in inebriated condition and pushed him down, due to sudden provocation, the petitioner assaulted the deceased with a wooden reaper with anger. PW3 and PW4 who were supporting the prosecution case have turned hostile. Since the appeal is not likely to be taken up in the near future, he may be granted suspension of sentence.

¶7Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that both P.W.1 and P.W.2 are the petitioner's own wife and daughter in law. They are the eye witness to the occurrence. Hence, it is clear that the prosecution has established its case. Considering the age of the petitioner, he strongly opposed to suspend the sentence of the petitioner.

¶8We have perused the records carefully and considered the rival submissions.

¶9Admittedly, the petitioner is not a previous offender. There is no record placed by the prosecution to conclude that the accused is likely to commit a crime in future or incapable of being reformed. The petitioner is in custody from 13.01.2020.

¶10Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody for nearly 5 years and in view of the fact that inquest witnesses P.W.3 and P.W. 4 have turned hostile and that the appeal is not likely to be taken up in the near future, we are inclined to suspend the sentence and grant bail to the petitioner/accused.

¶11Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands allowed and the sentence imposed on the petitioner is suspended on the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-, with two sureties each, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pappireddipatti;

(ii) The petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the trial Court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book and mobile numbers to ensure their identity;

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on the first working day of every month at 10.30 a.m., until the disposal of the appeal and if he is not able to appear before the trial Court on any day, he shall make arrangements to file an application under Section 317 Cr.P.C. and shall appear before the trial Court on any other day in lieu of the date of his absence, as directed by the trial Court.

(iv) On the failure of any of the above conditions by the petitioner / accused, it is open to the trial Court to commit the petitioner / accused into custody for undergoing the sentence. (M.S.R, J.) (N.S, J.)

21.02.2025 kas Note: Issue Order Copy on 24.02.2025 To

1.The Judicial Magistrate Court, Pappireddipatti.

2.The Additional District and Sessions Judge Dharmapuri

3.The Inspector of Police Bommidi Police Station Dharmapuri District Crime No.3 of 2020

4.The Superintendent of Prison Central Prison Vellore

5.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras Chennai 600 104 Crl.M.P.No.368o2025 inoCrl.A.No.55oofo2025 M.S.RAMESH,oJ. and N.SENTHILKUMAR,oJ. kas Crl.M.P.No.368oofo2025 inoCrl.A.No.55oofo2025

21.02.2025 8/8https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21.02.2025 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR Crl.M.P.No.368 of 2025 Chinnapaiyan ... Petitioner Vs. The State The Inspector of Police Bommidi Police Station Dharmapuri District Crime No.3 of 2020 ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 389(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail by suspending the sentence imposed on him in S.C.No.13 of 2021 dated 29.09.2022. For Petitioner : Mr.P.M.Bail For Respondent : Mr.S.Raja Kuar Additional Public Prosecutor