Rani v. The State Rep By Its,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

RESERVED ON : 10.01.2024 PRONOUNCED ON : 22.01.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Rani ..

Petitioner/A2

Versus

State rep.by The Inspector of Police Arcot Taluk Circle @ Walajapet Police Station, Ranipet District.

(Cr.No.373 of 2016) ..

Respondent/Complainant Prayer:- Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 389[1] of Cr.P.C., to suspend the sentence imposed in S.C.No.40 of 2018 dated 09.09.2022 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No.II, Vellore District @ Ranipet, and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the above Criminal Appeal.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Rajkumar

Mr.R.Sunil Kumar For Respondent : Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

[Order of the Court was delivered by SUNDER MOHAN , J] This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed seeking to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner by judgment and order dated 09.09.2022 passed in S.C.No.40 of 2018 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No.II, Vellore District @ Ranipet, and to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the appeal.

2. The petitioner, who was arrayed as A2 in the above Sessions Case, was convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo six months of simple imprisonment.

3. Challenging the above conviction and sentence, the petitioner has filed the above Criminal Appeal and she is seeking suspension of sentence and bail in the present petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner [A2] and Mr.E.Raj Thilak, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent/State.

5. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased and A1 were close friends and were in the habit of consuming liquour together; that three months before the occurrence, when they were in an inebriated condition, there was a wordy quarrel between them; that A1 assaulted the deceased with the Beer Bottle on the left side of the chest; that there was a compromise thereafter and that they continued their friendship; that on 17.09.2016 at about 20.00 hrs, when they were both consuming liquour in a public road, they assaulted each other; that pursuant to the said incident on 18.09.2016 at about 10.00 hrs, the deceased went to the house of the accused and questioned the accused about the previous day's incident and abused the petitioner (mother of A1), who was arrayed as A2; that enraged by the said conduct of the deceased, the petitioner is said to have attacked the deceased with a wooden log and the A1 is said to have stabbed the deceased on the left side of the stomach and left side of the chest with knife. Hence, a

complaint was registered on 18.09.2016 in Cr.No.373 of 2016 for the offence punishable under Sections 324 and 306 of IPC against the accused.

6. (i) Though several grounds have been raised by the petitioner herein, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated; that admittedly, the deceased and A1 were close friends and frequently quarrelled and thereafter continued their friendship; that the petitioner has nothing to do with the said quarrel; that in any case, the evidence discloses that the deceased was the aggressor and he came to attack the petitioner and A1 in their house.

(ii) Further, the learned counsel submitted that when the deceased was first taken to the hospital, PW1 had stated that three people attacked the deceased and there was no investigation as to who were those three persons. That apart, the petitioner and her son went to the police station to lodge a complaint even before the PW1 lodged the complaint against them and that they have been falsely implicated. He further submitted that the petitioner is a lady aged about 55 years and is in custody from 09.09.2022 and prayed

that the sentence imposed on the petitioner may be suspended.

7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor per contra submitted that since the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and the evidence of PW1, the eye witness has not been discredited by the defence, there is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of PW1. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.

8. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. We are of the view that considering the fact that the occurrence took place at the house of the petitioner/A2, which suggests that the deceased was the aggressor and the statement of PW1 to the Doctor that three persons were involved, raises a doubt in the prosecution case. The involvement of the petitioner in the facts of the case appears to be highly doubtful.

9. Considering the above facts; the overt act attributed against the petitioner; the fact that the petitioner is a lady aged about 55 years and in custody since 09.09.2022 and also the fact that the appeal is not likely to be taken up for final hearing in the near future, we are of the considered view

that it is a fit case to grant the relief of suspension of sentence to the petitioner herein.

10. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands allowed and the sentence of imprisonment is suspended 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, of whom, one should be a blood relative, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No.II, Vellore District @ Ranipet; (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; and (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 she is not able to appear before the trial Court on any day, she 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 her absence, as directed by the trial Court.

[M.S.R.,J.] [S.M.,J.]

22.01.2024 ars Issue order copy by 24.01.2024 Upload the order copy forthwith.

To 1.The Additional District and Sessions Judge No.II, Vellore District @ Ranipet.

2.The Inspector of Police, Arcot Taluk Circle @ Walajapet Police Station, Ranipet District.

3.The Superintendent of Prisons, Women Central Prison, Vellore.

4.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai - 600 104.

M.S.RAMESH, J and SUNDER MOHAN, J ars Pre-delivery order made in Crl.MP.No.2399/2023 in Crl.A.No.163 of 2023

22.01.2024