Allowed

Sathiyaseelan v. the State Rep by

Madras HC25 Mar 2024CRL MP/1184/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Convicted under Section 302 IPC for murder of a child based on circumstantial evidence, the appellant sought suspension of sentence pending appeal. Finding the circumstances not conclusively established prima facie and noting prolonged incarceration, the Madras High Court suspended the sentence on bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Sentence of imprisonment suspended; petitioner to be enlarged on bail on executing Rs.25,000 bond with two sureties and monthly appearance before trial court.

Sathiyaseelan Vs the State Rep by — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.MP.No.1184 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.264 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 25.03.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

¶7

Crl.MP.No.1184 of 2022

¶8

¶9

Crl.A.No.264 of 2020

¶10

Sathiyaseelan

¶11

...Petitioner/Appellant/Sole Accused

¶12

Versus

¶13

The State Rep.by: The Inspector of Police, Variyur Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District. Crime No.145 of 2014

¶14

...Respondent/Respondent/Complainant

¶15

Prayer:- Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 389 [1] r/w 439 of Crl.P.C. to suspend the sentence imposed in S.C.No.9 of 2016 dated 09.03.2020 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court Tiruvannamalai and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the above Criminal Appeal.

¶16

¶17

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

¶18

Crl.MP.No.1184 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.264 of 2020

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sathiaseelan

¶20

For Respondent : Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor Assisted by Mr.C.Aravind

¶21

ORDER

¶22

[Order of the Court was made by SUNDER MOHAN, J.]

¶23

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed seeking to

¶24

suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner/sole accused by Judgment

¶25

and order dated 09.03.2020 passed in SC No.9 of 2016 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Tiruvannamalai, and to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the criminal appeal.

¶26

The petitioner/sole accused in the above Sessions Case, was

¶27

convicted and sentenced as follows:

¶28

Offence under Section	Sentence imposed
302 of the IPC	To undergo imprisonment for life and
	to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two
	years.

¶29

¶30

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

¶31

Crl.MP.No.1184 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.264 of 2020

¶32

Challenging the above conviction and sentence, the petitioner/sole accused has filed the above Criminal Appeal and he seeks suspension of sentence and bail in the present petition.

¶33

Heard Mr.S.Sathiaseelan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.E.Raj Thilak, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent/State.

¶34

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/sole accused had illicit intimacy with P.W.1, who was a married lady and had two children out of the said marriage; that the husband of P.W.1 had deserted her, and thereafter, the petitioner wanted to live with P.W.1; that P.W.1 thereafter, developed an illicit relationship with P.W.16 and enraged by the said fact, the petitioner is said to have caused the death of the child of P.W.1 on 11.04.2014.

¶35

¶36

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

¶37

Crl.MP.No.1184 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.264 of 2020

¶38

Mr.S.Sathiaseelan, the learned counsel for the petitioner/

¶39

sole accused submitted that the circumstances have not been conclusively established by the prosecution; and that the motive and the last seen do not conclusively prove the guilt of the petitioner as both the circumstances have not been established. Hence, he prayed for suspension of sentence for the petitioner.

¶40

Mr.E.Raj Thilak, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor,

¶41

per contra submitted that P.W.1 and P.W.16 have spoken about the motive; that P.W.9/child witness and another witness had last seen the petitioner with the deceased child, which conclusively established the guilt of the petitioner; and that hence, this petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶42

We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶43

The petitioner is in custody from 09.03.2020. The case is based on circumstantial evidence. Prima facie, we are of the view that there is force in

¶44

¶45

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

¶46

Crl.MP.No.1184 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.264 of 2020

¶47

the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the circumstances have not been conclusively established to point out only to the guilt of the petitioner.

¶48

10.Considering the above facts, the period of incarceration, and that the appeal is not likely to be taken up in the near future, we are inclined to grant the relief of suspension of sentence to the petitioner herein.

¶49

Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands allowed

¶50

and the sentence of imprisonment is suspended and the sentence imposed on the petitioner is suspended on the following conditions:

¶51

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-, with two independent sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai;

¶52

(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

¶53

¶54

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

¶55

Crl.MP.No.1184 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.264 of 2020

¶56

their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book and mobile numbers to ensure their identity; and

¶57

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

¶58

[M.S.R.,J.] [S.M.,J.] 25.03.2024

¶59

¶60

Speaking/Non-Speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶61

Note to Registry:

¶62

1. Issue order copy by 26.03.2024

¶63

2. Upload the order forthwith.

¶64

¶65

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

¶66

Crl.MP.No.1184 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.264 of 2020

¶67

Copy to:-

¶68

1.The Principal District and Sessions Judge,

¶69

Tiruvannamalai

¶70

2.The The Inspector of Police, Variyur Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

¶71

3.The Superintendent of Prisons, Central Prison, Vellore.

¶72

4.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai – 600 104.

¶73

¶74

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

¶75

Crl.MP.No.1184 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.264 of 2020

¶76

M.S.RAMESH, J and SUNDER MOHAN, J dk

¶77

Crl.MP.No.1184 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.264 of 2020

¶78

25.03.2024

¶79

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

¶80

Sathiyaseelan v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sathiyaseelan v. the 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

R.Sumathi Vs State Rep by

Maheswari Vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by

Rani Vs State Rep by

Jayaseeli Vs the State Rep. by

Tara Vs the State Rep by Its

M/s.Tamil Nadu Development Foundation Trust Vs The Assistant commissioner of Police