Shantha vs State

R.Pongiappan, J

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been preferred by the petitioner/A-2, seeking to suspend the sentence imposed upon her, by judgment and order dated 31.01.2022 passed in C.A.No.14 of 2020 by the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Chidambaram, confirming the order of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Chidambaram, in S.C.No.145 of 2013 dated 05.11.2020 and to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

The petitioner, who is arrayed as A-2 in S.C.No.145 of 2013 on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Chidambaram. She was found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC and has been convicted and sentenced as under:

Offence

Sentence

Section 324 of IPC

Rigorous Imprisonment for 1 year along with fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 3 months

Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner had filed appeal in C.A.No.14 of 2020 and the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Chidambaram, by judgment dated 31.01.2022 had dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence, against which the present revision has been filed.

The case of the prosecution is that due to property dispute, the petitioner along with other accused attacked the de facto complainant with knife and wooden log. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioner under Section 324 of IPC.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, there are arguable points available in this Criminal Revision Petition and the petitioner has got a fair chance of succeeding in the Criminal Revision Petition. It is his specific submission that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 11.04.2022 and hence, the substantive sentence imposed against the petitioner may be suspended before the trial Court.

Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police raised serious objection for allowing this petition. He would further contend that the evidences recorded from the prosecution witnesses would prove the case of the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. According to him, interference of this Court is not necessary in the findings arrived at by the trial Court.

Heard Mr.K.V.Sridharan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), appearing for the respondent police and also perused the materials placed on record.

Submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side are considered. The evidence given by P.W.1 in respect to the alleged occurrence needs a detailed appraisal. Further, the petitioner is in judicial custody from 11.04.2022. Here, it is a case, the revision petition is not likely to be taken up in the near future. In such a view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled to the relief of suspension of sentence and bail.

Accordingly, sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended and bail is granted to the petitioner on the following conditions:

(a) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-, with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Chidambaram;

(b) The petitioner/accused and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impressions in the surety bonds and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar Cards or Bank Pass Books to ensure their identities; and

(c) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on the first working day of every English Calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until the disposal of the appeal and if she is not able to appear before the trial Court on any day, she 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 her absence, as directed by the trial Court.

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