P.Ayyanar v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twelfth day of September Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.PARTHIBAN CRL MP(MD) No.7872 & 7874 of 2019 IN CRL A(MD) No.411 of 2019 1 P.AYYANAR 2 A. KARUPPAYEE 3 M.LAKSHMI ... PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS Vs THE STATE REP BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MANAMADURAI SUB DIVISION, THIRUPUVANAM POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT, CRIME NO. 542 OF 2007.
... RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to suspend the sentence in S.C.No.174 of 2009 on the file of the Special Court, Sivagangai, dated 13.05.2019 convicting the 1st appellant for an offence under section 294(b), 323, 427, 506(ii) and 3 (1) (x) of SC/ST Act and 2nd and 3rd appellants for an offences under sections 294(b), 323 3 (1) (x) of SC/ST Act and allow the Criminal Appeal.
Prayer in CRL MP(MD). 7874/ 2019 :
Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to exempt the petitioners from surrender as per the judgment made in S.C.No.174 of 2009 on the file of the Special Court, Sivagangai, dated 13.05.2019 convicting the 1st appellant for an offence U/s. 1/4
294(b), 323, 427, 506(ii) and 3 (1) (x) of SC/ST Act 2nd and 3rd appellants for an affences under section 294(b), 323 3(1) (x) of SC/ST Act and allow the Criminal Appeal and pass such further or other order and may deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.S.GOKUL RAJ, Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.V.NEELAKANDAN, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:- The petitioners herein are the accused in S.C. No.174 of 2009 on the file of the Special Court, Sivagangai, and they were tried for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323, 427 and 506(ii) IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act and vide the impugned judgment dated 13.05.2019, the Special court convicted and sentenced the accused as under :- Section Accused Sentence U/s 294(b) IPC A1, A2 & A3 Convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month.
U/s 323 IPC A1, A2 & A3 Convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month.
U/s 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (P.A) 1989 Act A1, A2 & A3 Convicted and sentenced to undergo year rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- U/s 427 IPC A1 Convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month 2/4
U/s 506(II) IPC A1 Convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one month The sentences were ordered to run concurrently and set off was also granted u/s 428 Cr.P.C. The petitioners, challenging the legality of the said conviction and sentence, has filed the present appeal and pending disposal of the appeal, has filed this petition praying for suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that though many witnesses have been examined by the prosecution, however, all the witnesses are interested witnesses and in the absence of any independent witness, placing reliance on the testimony of interested witnesses to bring home the charge against the accused, in the circumstances of the case, is wholly inappropriate and not justified. It is the further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that there are very many contradictions and improvements in the testimony of the witnesses, which has not been properly appreciated by the trial court and, therefore, prays for suspension of sentence.
3. Per contra, Ms.M.Anantha Devi, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), appearing for the respondent submitted that the prosecution, through cogent and convincing testimony, has proved the offence committed by the accused and the trial court, on proper appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence has convicted and sentenced the accused and, therefore, this petition for suspension of sentence is liable to be dismissed.
4. This Court gave its careful consideration to the submissions on either side and also perused the materials available on record.
5. A perusal of the materials available on record show that no independent witness has been examined by the prosecution, though the occurrence is alleged to have been taken place in an open place. Further, the contradictions and improvements pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the testimony of the witnesses, who are alleged to be interested, coupled with nonexamination of independent witness also adds weightage to the case of the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for grant of suspension. Further, taking into consideration the fact that the petitioners are under incarceration and that the appeal is not likely to be taken up for hearing in the near future, this Court is of the considered view that this is a fit case to grant suspension of sentence.
6. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to suspend the substantive sentence of 3/4
imprisonment imposed on the petitioners/accused. Accordingly, the miscellaneous petitions are allowed and the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone stands suspended pending disposal of the appeal and the petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on condition that the petitioners execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- along with two sureties, each for a likesum, to the satisfaction of the Special Court, Sivagangai, and on further condition that the petitioners/accused shall appear before the said Court, at 10.30 a.m., on the first working day of every English calendar month until further orders.
sd/- 12/09/2019 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO
1. THE SPECIAL COURT, SIVAGANGAI
2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MANAMADURAI SUB DIVISION, THIRUPUVANAM POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT, +2. C.C. to M/S.S.GOKUL RAJ Advocate SR.No.15262 & 15263
ORDER
IN CRL MP(MD) No.7872 & 7874 of 2019 IN CRL A(MD) No.411 of 2019 Date :12/09/2019 TR/PN/SAR-I (17.09.2019) 4P 5C 4/4