Yuthistran v. The State Represented by

ORDER This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking suspension of sentence imposed by the learned III Addl. Sessions Judge, Chennai, in Crl.A.No. 435 of 2023 dated 17.09.2025 confirming the judgmetn passed in C.C.No.1610 of 2021 dated 13.04.2023 on the file of XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai and enlarge the petitioners on bail pending disposal of the above Criminal Revision Case.

¶2The petitioners herein are the accused in C.C.No.1610 of 2021 on the file of the learned XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai. They were found guilty of the offences under Section 294(b), 324 and 354 of IPC/BNS and under Sec.4 of TNPHW Act and they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and imposed total fine of Rs.6000/- Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have preferred an appeal before the III Addl. Sessions Judge, Chennai in Crl.A.No.435 of 2023 and by judgment dated

17.09.2025, the appeal was dismissed by confirming findings of trial judge. Aggrieved over the concurrent findings of the courts below, he filed the present Criminal Revision Case and consequently, they have filed this miscellaneous petition seeking for suspension of sentence.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners/accused would submit that there is a matrimonial dispute is pending between them and there are arguable points available in the Criminal Revision Case and the petitioners/accused have got a fair chance of succeeding in the Criminal Revision Case and hence, the substantive sentence imposed against the petitioners/accused may be suspended. He would submit that the petitioners are ready to abide the condition imposed by this Court.

¶4Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent/State raised serious objection for allowing this petition. Further, he would contend that the evidences recorded from the prosecution witnesses would prove the case of the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. According to him, interference of this Court is not necessary in the findings arrived at by the trial Court.

¶5Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and also perused the materials placed on record.

¶6Considering the fact that the defacto complainant and the petitioners are family members and since there is a matrimonial dispute is pending between them, there is a wordy quarrel arose. Considering that and considering the facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the quantum of punishment imposed upon the petitioners, also by considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, further this Criminal Revision Case is not likely to be taken for final hearing in the near future, this Court is of the view that the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone can be suspended on certain conditions.

¶7Accordingly, till the disposal of the Criminal Revision Case, the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed by the learned trial Judge is alone suspended and bail are granted on the following conditions:

(a) The petitioners/accused are ordered to be released on bail, on their executing a separate bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, in which one surety must be a blood surety, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai.

(b) The petitioners/accused and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impressions in the surety bonds and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar Cards or Bank Pass Books to ensure their identities.

(c) The petitioners shall appear before the Trial Court on the first working day of every English Calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until the disposal of the Criminal Revision Case and if they are not able to appear before the trial Court on any day, they 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 their absence, as directed by the trial Court.

¶8With the above directions, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is ordered. 21-11-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rpp To

¶1III Addl. Sessions Judge, Chennai.

¶2XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai.

¶3The Inspector of Police, N-1, Royapuram Police Station, Chennai - 600013.

¶4The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. CRLeMPeNo.e22052eofe2025 T.V.THAMILSELVIoJ. rpp CRLoMPoNo.o22052oofo 2025 INoCRLoRCoNO.o2486o OFo2025 21-11-2025 (2/2)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21-11-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI IN CRL RC NO. 2486 OF 2025 1. YUTHISTRAN S/o.Natarajan, No.6/1, 3rd Street, Singara Garden, Old Washermenpet, Chennai - 600021. and 2 Others 2. Ravi S/o.Rajendran, No.10-149, Indira Nagar, Karakambadi, Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh - 517 520. 3. Eswari W/o.Natarajan, NO.6/1, 3rd Street, Singara Garden, Old Washermenpet, Chennai - 600021. Petitioner(s) Vs The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, N-1, Royapuram Police Station, Chennai - 600013. Crime NO.72 of 2021 Respondent(s) PRAYER To pass a suspension of sentence order passed in Crl.A.No.435/2023 dated 17.09.2025 on the file of the learned III Additional Sessions Judge Madras against the order passed in C.C.No.1610/2021 dated 13.04.2023 on the file of the XVI Metropolitan Magistrate Court and enlarge the petition bail pending disposal of the above Criminal Revision Case For Petitioner(s): Mr. T.I.Ramanthan For Respondent: Dr.C.E.Pratap, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)