Sembulingam v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA in CRL.A(MD)No.720 of 2024 Sembulingam ... Petitioner vs.

The Inspector of Police, Thalavaipuram Police Station, Viruthunagar District.

(Crime No.222 of 2011) ... Respondent Petition filed under Section 430(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to suspend the sentence imposed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Court, Srivilliputhur in S.C.No.218 of 2011 dated 21.09.2023 and release the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the above criminal appeal. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Bhagavath Singh For Respondent : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor 1/6

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.] Seeking to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srivilliputhur, vide Judgment dated 21.09.2023 in S.C.No.218 of 2011, he has filed this criminal miscellaneous petition.

2. The petitioner stands convicted and sentenced as under: Section of Law Sentence of imprisonment Fine amount 449 IPC To undergo life imprisonment Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

302 IPC To undergo life imprisonment Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

392 IPC To undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment Rs.1000/-, in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

The sentences shall run concurrently.

2/6

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 04.05.2011 at about 12.15 p.m., the petitioner and other accused entered into the house of the deceased, murdered her and stolen the gold ornaments worth about Rs.75,000/-.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is a case of circumstantial evidence based on the last seen theory. P.Ws.4 to 6 are stated to be the witnesses, who have last seen the petitioner along with other accused entering into the house of the deceased. Though P.W.6 has admitted to have read about the incident in the newspaper on the next day i.e. on 05.05.2011 and that he was also examined by the respondent - Police on the same day, he had not informed to the Police about having seen the accused and only after arrest of the accused, his statement has been recorded by the Police and thereby, his evidence is doubtful.

Further, even as per the evidence of the Investigating Officer, chance finger prints were lifted at the scene of occurrence and after arrest of the accused, their finger prints had been taken, whereas, the prosecution had not taken any steps to compare the finger prints. Further, there are several arguable points in favour of the petitioner and the likelihood of the appeal being taken up for final hearing in the near future is also not possible and therefore, he prayed for suspension of sentence.

5. The respondent - Police has filed a detailed counter affidavit. 3/6

6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - Police, on instructions, would submit that it is a case of murder for gain. P.Ws.4 to 6 have last seen the petitioner and the other accused entering into the house of the deceased and based on the confession statement of the petitioner, incriminating materials have been recovered, thereby, he would object for grant of suspension of sentence to the petitioner.

7. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

8. Having gone through the records and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case , we are of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of suspension of sentence to the petitioner.

9. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone imposed on the petitioner herein is suspended, subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties, of whom, one should be a blood related surety, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srivilliputhur. 4/6

ii. 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 passbook to ensure their identity.

iii. The petitioner shall appear before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srivilliputhur, at 10.30 a.m., on the first working day of every calender month, until further orders. sd/- 18/08/2025 / TRUE COPY / /08/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

bala TO 1 The Additional District And Sessions Judge, Srivilliputhur.

2 The Superintendent,Central Prison, Madurai.

3 The Inspector of Police Thalavaipuram Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

4 The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

+1 CC to M/s.G.BHAGAVATH SINGH, Advocate ( SR-8915[I] dated 19/08/2025 )

ORDER

IN in CRL.A(MD)No.720 of 2024 Date :18/08/2025 AS/19.08.2025/6P/6C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023. 6/6