Dismissed

Raman v. State Represented by

Madras HC11 Feb 2021CRL MP/18573/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed to suspend sentence and grant bail during appeal. Court held the petition is not a fit case for suspension as the petitioner was identified by a witness. Petition dismissed; records to be called for disposal of main appeal.

What did the court decide?

Criminal miscellaneous petition dismissed. Main appeal to be posted for disposal in the first week of March.

Raman Vs State Represented by — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Thursday, the Eleventh day of February Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice P. N. PRAKASH

¶6

and

¶7

The Hon`ble Mr Justice V. SIVAGNANAM

¶8

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.18573 of 2019

¶9

IN CRL.A.No.880 of 2019

¶10

1 RAMAN [ APPELLANTS / ACCUSED 4 & 5 ] 2 LAKSHMANAN

¶11

¶12

STATE REPRESENTED BY [ RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARAMATHI CIRCLE, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT.

¶13

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the Memorandum of Grounds in Crl.A.No.880/2019 on the file of the High Court, the High Court will be pleased to suspend the sentence imposed in the Judgment in order passed by Principal Sessions Court, Namakkal in S.C.No.122 of 2016 vide his order dated 21.08.2019 and enlarge the petitioners on bail pending disposal of the above Crl.A.No.880/2019.

¶14

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the Memorandum of Grounds in Crl.A.No.880/2019 on the file of the High Court and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.DEEPAN UDAY, Advocate for the Petitioners and of MR.K.PRABAKAR Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶15

(Order of the Court was made by P.N.PRAKASH,J)

¶16

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed seeking to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioners by judgment dated 21.08.2019 passed in S.C.No.122 of 2016 on the file of the Principal Sessions Court, Namakkal and to enlarge the petitioner on bail till the disposal of the appeal.

¶17

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

¶18

The petitioner, who was the fourth accused in S.C.No.122 of 2016 before the Principal Sessions Court, Namakkal, was convicted and sentenced as follows on 21.08.2019:

¶19

Provision
Accused under which Sentence
convicted
Life imprisonment and fine of
Section 364-A
Rs.3,000/-, in default to undergo four
Raman (A4) IPC
years simple imprisonment, each
Lakshmanan Five years rigorous imprisonment and
Section 395 fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default to
(A5)
IPC undergo fifteen months simple
imprisonment, each
The aforesaid sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3. Heard Mr.Deepan Uday, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.K.Prabhakar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for
the respondent/State.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
petitioners were not identified by any witness.

¶20

On a perusal of the evidence of Senthil Kumar (PW2), it is seen that Senthil Kumar (PW2) has identified the first accused and he has stated that the other three accused were present at the time of occurrence.

¶21

In such view of the matter, this is not a fit case to grant suspension of sentence to the petitioners.

¶22

In fine, this criminal miscellaneous petition is dismissed. The Registry is directed to call the records, prepare the typed set of papers and post the main appeal for disposal in the first week of March.

¶23

-sd/-

¶24

11/02/2021

¶25

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶26

TRUE COPY

¶27

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶28

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

¶29

TO
1 THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
NAMAKKAL.
2 THE SUPERINTENDENT,
CENTRAL JAIL, COIMBATORE.
3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
PARAMATHI CIRCLE,
NAMAKKAL DISTRICT.
5 THE SECTION OFFICER,
CRIMINAL SECTION,
HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
C.C. to M/S. DEEPAN UDAY Advocate on payment of necessary
charges
Order
in
CRL MP.18573/2019
in
CRL.A.880/2019
Date :11/02/2021
From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified
copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format
cs 16/02/2021

¶30

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

Raman v. State Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raman v. State Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Chithra Vs The State Rep by its

A.Shanmugapriya Vs the State Rep.by Its

Union Bank of india Vs The Deputy Director

P.Saravanan Vs State Rep. by

Raman Vs State Rep.by

Balaji Vs State by Deputy Superintendent Fo Police