Allowed

S.Lawrence v. the State Represented by Its

Madras HC9 Dec 2024CRL MP/13759/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 374 Cr.P.C., the Madras High Court suspended the sentence and granted bail to a petitioner convicted of sexual assault under POCSO, noting that the appeal is unlikely to be taken up soon and granting relief pending disposal.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended till disposal of criminal appeal; petitioner released on bail with conditions including bond execution, surety requirements, and monthly appearances.

S.Lawrence Vs the State Represented by Its — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.M.P.No.13759 of 2024

¶2

in Crl.A.No.1229 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶4

DATED: 9/12/2024

¶5

CO R A M

¶6

The HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

¶7

CRL MP.No.13759 of 2024

¶8

in CRL A.No.1229 of 2024

¶9

S.Lawrance ... Petitioner

¶10

¶11

State rep. The Inspector of Police Kannagi Nagar Police Station Chennai 600 097. ... Respondent

¶12

Prayer: Petition filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to suspend the sentence imposed in Spl.S.C.No.185 of 2019 dated 9/10/2023 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chengalpattu and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the appeal.

¶13

For petitioner … Ms.K.Akshaya For respondent … Dr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate Criminal Side)

¶14

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

¶15

Page No:1/6

¶16

Crl.M.P.No.13759 of 2024

¶17

in Crl.A.No.1229 of 2024

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This petition has been filed to suspend the sentence imposed in Spl.S.C.No.185 of 2019 dated 9/10/2023 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chengalpattu and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the appeal.

¶20

It is the case of the prosecution that the victim was aged about 7 years; that the petitioner and the victim girl were living in the same area; that on 27/8/2018 at about 7.00 a.m., when the victim was sleeping on the tri-cycle belonging to her mother, the petitioner had lifted the skirt of the victim and touched the breast of the victim inappropriately and had inserted his finger in the private part of the victim and thereby, committed an offence under Section 376 (AB) and Section 5 (m) r/w. 6 of POCSO Act.

¶21

The learned trial Judge convicted the petitioner for the offence under Section 5 (m) r/w. 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with a fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No:2/6

¶23

Crl.M.P.No.13759 of 2024 in Crl.A.No.1229 of 2024

¶24

to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that

¶26

PW8-Doctor had deposed that when she examined the victim, the victim told her that the petitioner touched the breast of the victim inappropriately, and attempted to insert his finger in the private part; that the doctor had further noted that there were no external injuries in the private part of the victim and the hymen was intact; that the complaint was motivated; that the victim and the mother of the victim in their statements given under Section 164 Cr.P.C., had stated that the petitioner touched the private part and had not spoken about the alleged penetrative sexual assault; and that the petitioner is in custody from 09.10.2023 and hence the sentence may be suspended.

¶27

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that

¶28

the evidence of the victim child is cogent and consistent; and that the prosecution had established its case beyond reasonable doubt and hence, petitioner should not be granted suspension of sentence.

¶29

6.Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the

¶30

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

¶31

Page No:3/6

¶32

Crl.M.P.No.13759 of 2024 in Crl.A.No.1229 of 2024

¶33

petitioner and finding force in the same, which require consideration in the above appeal; that the appeal is not likely to be taken up in the near future; that it has to be examined whether the conviction even for the offence of sexual assault can be based on the sole testimony of the victim, in the above appeal; and that the petitioner is in custody from 09.10.2023, this Court is inclined to grant the relief of suspension of sentence.

¶34

7.Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands allowed and the sentence imposed on the petitioner, is suspended till the disposal of the criminal appeal and he is ordered to be released on bail on the following conditions:

¶35

(i)The petitioner 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 Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chengalpattu;

¶36

(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

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No:4/6

¶38

Crl.M.P.No.13759 of 2024 in Crl.A.No.1229 of 2024

¶39

copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book and mobile numbers to ensure

¶40

their identity;

¶41

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

¶42

9/12/2024

¶43

Note: Issue order copy by 16 .12.2024

¶44

mvs/ars

¶45

¶46

The Sessions Judge, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chengalpattu

¶47

The Inspector of Police Kannagi Nagar Police Station Chennai 600 097.

¶48

The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal 1.

¶49

The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras Chennai.

¶50

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

¶51

Page No:5/6

¶52

Crl.M.P.No.13759 of 2024 in Crl.A.No.1229 of 2024

¶53

SUNDER MOHAN,J

¶54

mvs/ars

¶55

Crl.M.P.No.13759 of 2024 in Crl.A.No.1229 of 2024

¶56

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No:6/6

¶57

Crl.M.P.No.13759 of 2024

¶58

in Crl.A.No.1229 of 2024

¶59

9/12/2024

¶60

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No:7/6

S.Lawrence v. the State Represented by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Lawrence v. the State Represented by Its

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

Thavamani Vs State Rep by

Vishnu Vijay Vs State rep by

C.H.S.Gopi Vs Tamil Nadu Vanniyakula Kshatriya Public Charitable Trust and Endowments Board Rep. by Its

B.Surendar Vs the Intelligence Officer

K.Ashok Kumar Vs Anitha

B.Vimal Kumar Vs the State of Tamilnadu Rep by