S.Sumathy vs S.Devi

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the Revision Petitioner, praying to suspend the sentence imposed on her in Crl.A.No.392 of 2025, dated 09.07.2026, by the learned XXI Additional Sessions Judge, Additional City Civil Court, Allikulam, Chennai, confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 27.02.2025, made in S.T.C.No.675 of 2022, by the learned VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai, pending disposal of the present Criminal Revision Petition.

By the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court, the Revision Petitioner, being the sole accused, was convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of twelve months and to pay a compensation of Rs.9,45,000/- under Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C., in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a further period of three months.

Challenging the above said judgment of conviction and sentence, the Revision Petitioner has filed the above Crl.R.C.No.2469 of 2026, along with the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, seeking suspension of sentence and bail pending disposal of the Criminal Revision.

This Court heard the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner and perused the materials placed before this Court.

The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner submitted that the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to undergo twelve months Simple Imprisonment and to pay compensation of Rs.9,45,000/-. The said conviction and sentence were confirmed by the Appellate Court. It is further submitted that both the Courts below failed to properly appreciate the evidence available on record, particularly the defence evidence and the bank statement marked as Ex.R1. The Courts below have also failed to consider the financial capacity of the complainant to advance the alleged loan amount of Rs.9,45,000/- and the other discrepancies in the evidence of the complainant. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner has raised substantial grounds in the Criminal Revision Petition, which require detailed consideration by this Court.

The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner was on bail during the trial and also during the pendency of the appeal. However, pursuant to the dismissal of the appeal and confirmation of the conviction and sentence, the petitioner is now confined in prison. It is further submitted that the petitioner has a fair chance of succeeding in the Criminal Revision Petition and that the revision is not likely to be taken up for final hearing in the near future. Hence, the learned counsel prayed for suspension of sentence and enlargement of the petitioner on bail.

The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner further submitted that, in compliance with the order dated 02.11.2026 passed by this Court, the petitioner has already deposited 30% of the cheque amount, viz., Rs.2,83,500/-, before the learned Trial Court in S.T.C.No.675 of 2022. The petitioner has also produced the deposit receipt evidencing the said payment before this Court, which is taken on record.

It is further submitted by the learned counsel that, even earlier, pursuant to the order passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai, in the appeal proceedings, the petitioner had deposited 10% of the cheque amount, viz., Rs.94,500/-. Thus, the petitioner has deposited a total sum of Rs.3,78,000/-(Rs.2,83,500/- + Rs.94,500/-), which works out to 40% of the cheque amount of Rs.9,45,000/-. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner has duly complied with the conditions imposed by the Courts and has demonstrated her bona fides. Hence, the learned counsel prayed that the sentence may be suspended and the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and on perusal of the materials available on record, this Court is of the view that the Revision Petitioner has raised substantial grounds in the Criminal Revision Petition, particularly with regard to the appreciation of the defence evidence, the bank statement marked as Ex.R1 and the financial capacity of the complainant to advance the alleged loan amount. These aspects require detailed consideration at the time of final disposal of the Criminal Revision Petition.

Further, it is seen that the petitioner was on bail during the trial and also during the pendency of the appeal. However, she is now in prison pursuant to the confirmation of the conviction and sentence by the Appellate Court. This Court also takes note of the fact that the petitioner has already deposited a sum of Rs.3,78,000/-, representing 40% of the cheque amount, in compliance with the orders passed in the appellate proceedings as well as by this Court. The deposit receipt produced by the petitioner evidencing the deposit of Rs.2,83,500/- pursuant to the order dated 02.11.2026 is also taken on record.

In this regard, it is relevant to refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Rabi Prakash Vs. The State of Odisha, reported in 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 533, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has emphasised the importance of considering the personal liberty of an accused who has undergone incarceration, particularly when the matter requires further consideration by the higher Court.

In the present case, considering the grounds raised in the Criminal Revision Petition, the fact that the petitioner is presently in prison, the substantial amount already deposited by her towards the cheque amount and the likelihood of delay in taking up the Criminal Revision Petition for final disposal, this Court is of the view that the continued incarceration of the petitioner is not warranted at this stage. The petitioner has also demonstrated her bona fides by complying with the deposit conditions imposed by the Courts. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to grant the relief of suspension of sentence and bail to the Revision Petitioner, pending disposal of the Criminal Revision Petition.

Accordingly, pending disposal of the Criminal Revision Case, the sentence imposed on the Revision Petitioner, namely, Mrs.S.Sumathy, Wife of R.Sampath, is suspended and she is ordered to be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:

With the above directions, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed.