Partly allowed

Krishnadas v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Madras HC8 Jun 2016CRL MP(MD)/4325/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision regarding conviction under Section 304-A I.P.C., the Madras High Court held that prima facie cases merit revision bail. The court granted revision bail and suspended the imprisonment sentence awarded by the trial and appellate courts while retaining the fine, allowing the petitioner to appear monthly.

What did the court decide?

Revision bail granted; sentence of imprisonment suspended; fine retained; petitioner to execute bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties and appear monthly.

Krishnadas Vs the Sub Inspector of Police — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶2

Wednesday, the Eighth day of June Two Thousand Sixteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Dr.Justice P.DEVADASS

¶5

CRL MP(MD) No.4325 of 2016 IN CRL RC(MD) No.339 of 2016

¶6

KRISHNADAS ... PETITIONER

¶7

¶8

THE STATE REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION WING POLICE STATION, NAGERCOIL. (CR.NO. 43 OF 2007) ... RESPONDENT

¶9

Prayer : Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to suspend the sentence imposed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Nagercoil in S.T.C.No. 2823 of 2007 dated 19.11.2009 and the confirming judgement of conviction and sentence passed by the Learned Mahila Fast Track Court, Nagercoil dated 01.04.2016 in C.A.No. 64 of 2009 and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the main revision

¶10

Prayer in Crl.RC(MD)No.339 of 2016 :

¶11

To call for records relating to judgment passed by the Learned Mahila Fast Track Court, Nagercoil dated 01.04.2016 in C.A.No.64 of 2009 confirming the judgment passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.3, Nagercoil in S.T.C.No.2823 of 2007 dated 19.11.2009 and set aside the same.

¶12

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S N.DILIP KUMAR, Advocate for the petitioner and of Mrs.S.Prabha, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) on behalf of the Respondent and the court made the following order:-

¶13

The revision petitioner challenges the legality and propriety of the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court as well as the appellate Court.

¶14

2.The revision petitioner is the accused in a case under Section 304-A I.P.C. in S.T.C.No.2823 of 2007.

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

3.The learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Nagercoil convicted

¶17

and sentenced the petitioner to undergo 3 month S.I. plus fine Rs.2,000/- i/d 1 month S.I.

¶18

4.The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mahila Fast Track Court, Nagercoil confirmed the conviction and sentence and dismissed the Criminal Appeal No.64 of 2009.Fine amount has been paid.

¶19

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there

¶20

are very many legal infirmities in the conviction recorded by the trial Court and by the appellate Court and they are required to be revised.

¶21

6.On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) would submit that the conviction recorded by the trial Court as well as the appellate Court are perfectly correct and they require no disturbance.

¶22

7.In the facts and circumstances, perusing the impugned judgments and the materials on record, I am of the view that certain eminently arguable points are involved in this Criminal Revision. They are required to be examined in detail at the main criminal revision. It will take some time for the disposal of this Criminal revision. Further, the petitioner was on bail in the trial Court. I see primafacie case. I am inclined to grant revision bail to the petitioner.

¶23

8.In view of the above, ordered as under:

¶24

(1) Revision bail granted.

¶25

(2) Sentence of imprisonment awarded by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Nagercoil in S.T.C.No.2823 of 2007 as confirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Nagercoil in Crl.A.No.64 of 2009 alone is suspended.

¶26

(3) There shall be two sureties, who shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each as well as by the petitioner to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Nagercoil.

¶27

(4) The petitioner shall appear before the said Court on the first working day of every month at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

¶28

/ TRUE COPY /

¶29

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Madurai - 625 023.

¶30

TO
1	THE ADDITIONAL SESSION JUDGE, FAST TRACK MAHILA COURT, NAGERCOIL.
2	THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT AT NAGERCOIL.
3	THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.III, NAGERCOIL
4	THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT AT NAGERCOIL.
5	THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION WING POLICE STATION, NAGERCOIL.
6	THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
+1.	C.C. to M/S N.DILIP KUMAR Advocate SR.No.28670
SJ
JM/	AAL-MPA/SAR-III/09.06.2016/3P-8C
	ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) No.4325 of 2016 IN
	CRL RC(MD) No.339 of 2016 Date :08/06/2016

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Krishnadas v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnadas v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S. Murugan Vs Tamilarasi

T. Devendiran Vs the Inspector of Police

Thangam @ Thangathai Vs M.Subiramaniya @ Subiramani

Kumaran Vs Rajeshkumar

B. Poongothai Vs K. Karuppasamy

Ramkumar Vs Radha