Anbu @ Shet @ Ayyanar v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Thiruppuvanam

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble A.D.Jagadish Chandira J.) This petition has been filed seeking suspension of the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by the learned Sessions Judge (Fast Track Mahila Court), Sivagangai in Sessions Case No.8 of 2012 dated 15.09.2025 and to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on 16.05.2010 at about 17.00 hours, when PW1 and her husband were returning from Silaiman on a two-wheeler, due to previous enmity, the accused persons intercepted them near the Ayyanar Temple and A1 and A2 kidnapped PW1's husband on PW3's two-wheeler. At that time, A3 snatched the gold chain from PW1 and left the place. Thereafter, the accused persons committed the murder of PW1's husband. Based on the complaint given by PW1, an FIR in Crime No.200 of 2010 was registered.

¶3The Trial Court, on considering the facts and circumstances and on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, came to the conclusion that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly, convicted and sentenced the petitioner in the following manner: Section of Law Sentence of imprisonment Fine Section 506(ii) IPC Two years Rigorous Imprisonment Rs.100/- i/d to undergo three months Simple Imprisonment Section 364 IPC Five years Rigorous Imprisonment Rs.100/- i/d to undergo three months Simple Imprisonment Section 302 r/w. 34 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.1,000/- i/d to undergo six

months

Simple Imprisonment

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though it is the case of the prosecution that PW1, the wife of the deceased, had knowledge of the kidnapping of her husband by A2 and A3 and that she is said to have raised an alarm, she did not give any complaint on 16.05.2010. She gave a complaint only on

17.05.2010, based on which the body was said to be lying in the agricultural field was recovered. There is no witness to the alleged act of murder committed by the accused. PW1 has not spoken anything about the involvement of the present petitioner, who has been arrayed as A1. He would further submit that there is a specific allegation as against A3 and A3 has also been granted bail by this Court in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.2554 of 2026 in Crl.A.(MD) No.180 of 2026, dated 26.02.2026. He further submitted that the petitioner was on bail during the trial and had complied with the conditions and had not misused the liberty granted to him. According to him, there are several arguable points in the appeal and the likelihood of the appeal being taken up for final hearing in the near future is also not probable. Hence, he prays for suspension of sentence to be granted to the petitioner.

¶5The respondent has filed a detailed counter. The learned Counsel for the State of TN appearing on behalf of the respondent would submit that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and that the petitioner, along with two other accused persons, due to previous enmity, kidnapped the deceased and murdered him.

¶6Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶7Having heard the learned counsels, we are of the opinion that it is a case for grant of bail. Further the co-accused, who has been similarly placed was also granted bail by this Court.

¶8Accordingly, the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone imposed on the petitioner herein is suspended, subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on executing a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Sivagangai District. ii. 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 passbook to ensure their identity. iii. The petitioner shall appear and sign before the trial Court on the first working day of every English calender month at 10.30 a.m., till the disposal of the Criminal Appeal. (A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA J.) (R.POORNIMA J.)

13-07-2026 Indu To

1.The Inspector Of Police, Thiruppuvanam Police Station Sivagangai District.

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

CRL MP(MD) NO. 6421 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13-07-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA AND THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R. POORNIMA Crl.M.P(MD) No.6421 of 2026 in Crl.A(MD) No.363 of 2026 Anbu @ Shet @ Ayyanar Petitioner Vs State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Thiruppuvanam Police Station Sivagangai District. Crime No.200 of 2010. Respondent For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Maya Perumal For Respondent(s): Mr.C.Christopher Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) Prayer: To suspend the sentence imposed by the learned Sessions Judge (Fast Track Mahila Court), Sivagangai in Sessions Case No.8/2012 dated 15.09.2025 and enlarge the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail till the disposal of the criminal appeal.