Viji v. The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Eighteenth day of December Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice V. PARTHIBAN CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.17250 of 2018 IN CRL A.No.604 of 2018 VIJI [ PETITIONER/APPELLANT ] Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, [ RESPONDENT ] B-2, ESPLANADE POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

CR.NO.463/2013.

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the Memorandum of Grounds in CRL A.No.604 of 2018 on the file of the High Court, the High Court will be pleased to suspend the sentence imposed in Judgment dated 27.06.2017 in S.C.No.183 of 2014 on the file of the Mahila Court, Chennai, and enlarged on bail pending disposal of the above CRL A.No.604 of 2018[ CRL.M.P.No.17250 of 2018 ] Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the Memorandum of Grounds in CRL A.No.604 of 2018 on the file of the High Court and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.K.THENRAJAN, Advocate for the petitioner and of Mrs.V.SARATHADEVI Government Advocate on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:- The petitioner/appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.

183 of 2014, on the file of the Special Court for cases under POCSO Act, 2012/Mahila Court, Chennai. By judgment dated 27.06.2017, the trial Court has convicted the appellant for offence under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code; under Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ('POCSO Act' for brevity). The maximum punishment imposed upon the petitioner is 10 years Rigorous Imprisonment under the POCSO Act, with usual default clause. Hence, the petitioner seeks suspension of sentence.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant pointed out that there are certain holes in the prosecution case while convicting the accused under the provisions of the POCSO Act and the petitioner/appellant was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment

for ten years. He would further submit that the petitioner is languishing in jail for the past one year and six months and he is also suffering from illness. The learned counsel for the petitioner would also point out certain infirmities and lacuna in the case of the prosecution. He would also submit that this is a case of love affair, since both the petitioner and the victim girl were in relationship. The petitioner has not committed any offence, as projected by the prosecution, is the contention raised by the learned counsel. There are material contradictions in the prosecution case and there are arguable points involved in the appeal. Therefore, the learned counsel prays for suspending the sentence. 3.

In view of the fact that there are several infirmities in the prosecution case and there are arguable points involved in the appeal, as contended by learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner herein is entitled to the relief of grant of suspension of sentence. 4.Accordingly, the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended and the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on condition that he shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees Ten Thousand only] with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Mahila Court, Chennai, and on further condition that the petitioner shall report before the trial Court daily at 10.30 a.m., pending disposal of the appeal.

-sd/- 18/12/2018 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE MAHILA COURT CHENNAI 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, B-2, ESPLANADE POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

+1C.C. to M/S.K.THENRAJAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.24360 Order in CRL MP.17250/2018 in CRL A.604/2018 Date :18/12/2018 From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format cm 20/12/2018