Allowed

Santhakumar v. State Rep.by

Madras HC15 Nov 2021CRL MP/4880/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras heard a criminal miscellaneous petition challenging the suspension of a sentence. The petitioner had been convicted for offences under Sections 279 and 304(A) IPC. The court, considering arguable points in the pending revision and the time served, suspended the substantive sentence.

What did the court decide?

The substantive sentence of imprisonment was suspended and the petitioner was enlarged on bail.

Santhakumar Vs State Rep.by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Monday, the Fifteenth day of November Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.4880 of 2021

¶7

IN CRL.RC.No.210/2021

¶8

SANTHAKUMAR [ PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED ]

¶9

¶10

STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, J-3, GUINDY, TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION, CHENNAI.

¶11

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to suspend the order of conviction and sentence passed as against the petitioner herein by the Honble IV Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, in Criminal Appeal No.123 of 2016 dated 17.02.2021, confirming the Judgment of the (*)Honble 4^th Metropolitan Magistrate at Saidapet, Chennai in C.C.No.10698 of 2010, dated 11.04.2016 and enlarge the petitioner on bail, till the disposal of the above Criminal Revision

¶12

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S. A.EDWIN PRABAKAR, Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.S.SUGENDRAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶13

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused, seeking suspension of sentence of imprisonment, imposed by the judgment, dated 17.02.2021, made in Crl.A.No.123 of 2016, by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai confirming the judgment of (*)Honble 4^th Metropolitan Magistrate at Saidapet, Chennai made in CC.No.10698 of 2010, dated 11.04.2016 pending disposal of the Criminal Revision Case.

¶14

This court heard the learned counsel on either side and also perused the materials placed on record.

¶15

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

¶16

In and by the impugned judgement, the Petitioner/ accused was convicted and sentenced to six months simple imprisonment for the offence under Sections 279 IPC and two years simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 304(A) IPC.

¶17

According to the learned counsel for the Petitioner/ accused, there are arguable points available in the Criminal Revision Case, which is not likely to be taken for final hearing in the near future and the Petitioner/ accused has got a fair chance of succeeding in the Criminal Revision Case and hence, the substantive sentence imposed against the Petitioner/Accused may be suspended. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody from 17.02.2021 for the past nine months.

¶18

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) has raised objections for suspending the sentence.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions of the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone can be suspended on certain conditions. Accordingly, till the disposal of the Criminal Revision Case, the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended and the Petitioner/ accused is ordered to be enlarged on bail, on the following conditions:-

¶20

i.The Petitioner/ accused shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned (*)Honble 4^th Metropolitan Magistrate at Saidapet, Chennai

¶21

ii.The Petitioner//accused shall report before (*)Honble 4^th Metropolitan Magistrate at Saidapet, Chennai , on the first working day of every English Calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶22

-sd/-

¶23

15/11/2021

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

(*)Amended as per order of this Court dated 15.11.2021 made in Crl.M.P.No.11938/2021 in Crl.R.C.No.210/2021

¶28

¶29

1 IV ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE CITY CIVIL COURT CHENNAI

¶30

(*)2 THE IV METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI

¶31

3 THE IV METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE EGMORE, CHENNAI

¶32

4 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI

¶33

5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, J-3, GUINDY, TRAFFIC INVESTIGATION, CHENNAI.

¶34

6 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL, CHENNAI

¶35

7 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, MADRAS

¶36

+2 C.C. to M/S. A.EDWIN PRABAKAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.No.13031,13086

¶37

Order

¶38

in CRL MP.4880/2021

¶39

in CRL.RC.No.210/2021

¶40

Date :15/11/2021

¶41

From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format

¶42

APN 15/11/2021 APN 22/11/2021

¶43

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

Santhakumar v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhakumar v. State Rep.by

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

C.a.Subramaniam Vs Hari Enterprises

V.Mugilan Vs the Sub-Inspector of Police

Ravi Vs the State Rep.by

M.D.Sekar Vs Saravanan

Samikannu Vs State Rep by

Murugan Vs the State by