Allowed

S.Ganesh v. State Rep.by

Madras HC1 Feb 2023CRL MP/19123/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment granted a stay on the substantive imprisonment sentence of the petitioner convicted under the POCSO Act and IPC. The High Court directed his release on bail while his criminal appeal was pending, noting arguable points in the appeal and the need for detailed evidence appraisal.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of substantive sentence of imprisonment; enlargement on bail conditioned on a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties.

S.Ganesh Vs State Rep.by — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.MP No.19123 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1257 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated 01.02.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

¶6

Crl.MP No.19123 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1257 of 2022

S.Ganesh

... Petitioner

Vs.

State rep by: the Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Cuddalore District.

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

Prayer: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C to suspend the sentence imposed by judgment dated 25.08.2022 made in Spl.S.C.No.5/2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court

¶13

(POCSO Act Cases), Cuddalore and enlarge the petitioner on bail, pending disposal of the Criminal Appeal.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Palaninathan For Respondent : Mr.C.E.Pratap, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶15

ORDER

¶16

This petition has been filed to suspend the sentence imposed on the

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

Page 1 of 6

¶19

Crl.MP No.19123 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1257 of 2022

¶20

petitioner by the Trial Court in Spl.S.C.No.5/2019, vide judgment dated

¶21

25.08.2022, pending disposal of the Criminal Appeal.

¶22

The learned learned Sessions Judge, Special Court (POCSO Act

¶23

Cases), Cuddalore, vide judgment dated 25.08.2022 passed in

¶24

Spl.S.C.No.5/2019 convicted and sentenced the petitioner, as extracted

¶25

hereunder.

¶26

Conviction under Section	Sentence
Sec.450 IPC	10 years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment.
Sec.506(2) IPC	7 years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment.
Sec.3 &4 of POCSO Act	7 years Rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, to undergo 3 months simple imprisonment.

¶27

The Trial Court, ordered the above sentence of imprisonments to run concurrently.

¶28

Aggrieved by the above judgment of conviction and sentence passed

¶29

by the Trial Court, the petitioner filed the present Criminal appeal along with

¶30

Page 2 of 6

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

Crl.MP No.19123 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1257 of 2022

¶33

the instant petition to suspend the sentence and to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶34

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there are arguable points in this Criminal Appeal. He further submitted that the PW1/victim, during her cross examination, admitted that her father gave a false complaint against the petitioner/accused and only as per the instructions given by her father, she gave statement before the Magistrate. He further submitted that, now, the petitioner is in judicial custody and hence, prayed for suspension of sentence.

¶35

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate(Crl. side) appearing for the respondent and I have perused the impugned judgment and the materials on record.

¶36

Considering the evidence of PW1 and the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for both sides, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has substantial grounds in this Criminal Appeal and the oral and documentary evidence adduced before the Trial Court require detailed appraisal by this Court. Further, taking into account the incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant suspension of

¶37

Page 3 of 6

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

Crl.MP No.19123 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1257 of 2022

¶40

sentence.

¶41

Accordingly, it is ordered as follows.

¶42

(i) The substantive sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended and

¶43

the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court (POCSO Act Cases), Cuddalore.

¶44

(ii) The petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Trial Court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

¶45

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court as and when required.

¶46

01.02.2023

¶47

(2/2)

¶48

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No mst

¶49

¶50

Page 4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶51

Crl.MP No.19123 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1257 of 2022

¶52

1.The Sessions Judge, Special Court (POCSO Act Cases),Cuddalore.

¶53

2.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Cuddalore.

¶54

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶55

Page 5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶56

Crl.MP No.19123 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1257 of 2022

¶57

V.SIVAGNANAM, J.

¶58

mst

¶59

Crl.M.P.No.19123 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1257 of 2022

¶60

01.02.2023

¶61

(2/2)

¶62

Page 6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

S.Ganesh v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Ganesh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Michael @ Manikandan Vs Inspector of Police

Jeeva Vs State Rep by

S.Prabhakaran Vs R.Vadivel

R.Durai Vs Inspector of Police

M.Narasimhan Vs Forest Ranger

G.Loganathan Vs the State Rep by the Inspector of Police