Kamaraj v. Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 05.03.2024

CORAM

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

Petitioner

Versus

State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Nannilam Police Station, Nannilam, Tiruvarur District.

..

Respondent Prayer:-Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C., to suspend the sentence imposed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvarur in S.C.No.24/2019 dated 05.02.2021 and enlarge the petitioner on bail.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Samivel For Respondent : Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.C.Aravind

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by SUNDER MOHAN , J] This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed seeking to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner vide judgement and order dated 05.02.2021 passed in S.C.No.24 of 2019 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvarur and to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the appeal. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the deceased and the petitioner are brothers; and that the petitioner and his wife were lying in the pathway when the deceased wanted to go to his house at around 1.15 a.m. on 30.05.2018, which resulted in a wordy quarrel and both of them assaulted each other. Thereafter, the petitioner allegedly poured kerosene over the deceased and set fire on him. Subsequently, the deceased was taken to the

hospital and he died on 05.06.2018 due to the burn injuries suffered by him. 3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.E. Raj Thilak, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent/Police.

4.Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Ex.P1, the complaint lodged by the deceased and Ex.P11, the dying declaration given to the learned Magistrate are contrary to each other. That apart, the dying declaration only suggests that there was a sudden quarrel between the two and there was no premeditation or motive for the petitioner to cause the death of the deceased. Further, Ex.P9, the accident register reveals that the deceased suffered burns due to self immolation under the influence of alcohol.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, per contra, submitted that the deceased has given an explanation for the entires in the accident register and had stated that it was the petitioner who said so before the doctor in the

complaint, Ex.P1. The 2 dying declarations namely Ex.P1 and Ex.P11 are consistent and corroborate each other and establish the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt and prayed for dismissal of the petition. 6.We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the records.

7. The petitioner is in custody from 05.02.2021. The accident register, Ex.P9, discloses that the deceased was taken to the hospital by one Ayyapan, who was examined as P.W.1 and turned hostile. The entries in the accident register further state that the burns were due to self immolation. It is seen that this version is contrary to the prosecution case. At the time of admission to the hospital (i.e) at 1.40 a.m., on 30.05.2018, the deceased was drowsy and disoriented as he had suffered 63% burns. Thus, the voluntariness and truthfulness of the two dying declarations, Ex.P1 and Ex.P11, recorded an hour later, are doubtful. We hasten to add that this is only our prima facie view.

8. However, considering the above facts and the petitioner has been in custody since 05.02.2021, and the appeal is not likely to be taken up in the near future, we are inclined to grant the relief of suspension of sentence to the petitioner herein.

9. 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 independent sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal & District Judge, Tiruvarur;

(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 weekly twice i.e., on every Monday and Thursday 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.

[M.S.R.,J.] [S.M.,J.] 05.03.2024 Anu Issue order copy by 06.03.2024 Upload the order copy forthwith.

Internet: Yes To 1.The Principal & District Judge, Tiruvarur 2.The Inspector of Police, Nannilam Police Station, Nannilam, Tiruvarur District.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Trichy.

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

M.S.RAMESH, J and SUNDER MOHAN, J Anu 05.03.2024