Rajkumar v. State Rep By, Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN in Crl.A.No.571 of 2025 Rajkumar

...Petitioner

Vs.

State Rep By The Inspector of Police Thirunallar Police Station, Karaikal, Puducherry Crime No.20 of 2023 ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 430 of B.N.S.S., 2023, to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner/appellant by the learned Sessions Judge (Under the POCSO Act, 2012), Karaikal in Spl.S.C.No.11 of 2023 dated 30.09.2024 pending disposal of the above appeal.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.N.Arun Kumar For Respondent : Mr.K.S.Mohandass Public Prosecutor (Pondy)

ORDER

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking suspension of sentence imposed by the learned Sessions Judge (Under the POCSO Act, 2012), Karaikal, in Spl.S.C.No.11 of 2023 dated 30.09.2024, and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the above appeal.

2.

The petitioner, who is an accused in Spl.S.C.No.11 of 2023, was convicted and sentenced by the learned Sessions Judge (Under the POCSO Act, 2012), Karaikal, vide judgment dated 30.09.2024, as follows: Rank of the accused Conviction under Section Sentence awarded Sole accused 366 A of IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 months 9 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act.

to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year.

6 of POCSO Act, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 20 years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months

Rank of the accused Conviction under Section Sentence awarded 323 of IPC to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months.

506(i) IPC to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 years 3.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent. 4.

This Court finds no reasons to suspend the sentence since the Trial Court has gone through the evidence in its entirety and also finds that the petitioner had committed very serious and heinous offence as against the victim girl who is aged about 17 years at the time of occurrence. 5.

In the result, the petition for suspension of sentence is dismissed.

24.06.2025 (2/2) Index : Yes/No : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order Lpp

To 1.The Sessions Judge (Under the POCSO Act, 2012), Karaikal. 2.The Inspector of Police Thirunallar Police Station, Karaikal, Puducherry.

3.The Public Prosecutor (Pondy), High Court of Madras, Chennai.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

Lpp 24.06.2025 (2/2)