Allowed

Rajagopal v. State Rep by

Madras HC19 Feb 2024CRL MP/14727/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court suspended the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on the petitioner convicted under Section 302 IPC, granting bail pending the disposal of his criminal appeal. The court considered the period of incarceration served and the delay in appeal listing.

What did the court decide?

Sentence of life imprisonment suspended; petitioner released on bail on execution of bond for Rs.25,000/- with two sureties and monthly appearance before trial court.

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

¶1

Crl.M.P.No.14727 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1096 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 19.02.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

¶6

Crl.M.P.No.14727 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1096 of 2022

V.Rajagopal

... Petitioner

Vs.

State by The Inspector of Police, Veeraganaur Circle, Veeraganaur, Salem District, Gengavalli Police Station. Cr.No.24/2014

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 389(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeking to suspend the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on the petitioner by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem in S.C.No.116 of 2015 in order dated 22.08.2019 and release the accused on bail pending disposal of the appeal.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthukrishnan

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.E. Raj Thilak, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/6

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Crl.M.P.No.14727 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1096 of 2022

¶18

(Order of the Court was delivered by SUNDER MOHAN, J.)

¶19

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner/accused by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem on 22.08.2019 in S.C.No.116 of 2015 and enlarge him on bail.

¶20

2. The learned Principal Sessions Judge, Salem, in S.C.No.116 of

¶21

2015, has convicted the petitioner/accused and sentenced him as follows:-

¶22

	*Offence*	*Sentence imposed*
		Rigorous imprisonment for life
*Accused*	Section 302 of	and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in
	IPC	default to undergo imprisonment for 4 years.

¶23

3. Challenging the above conviction and sentence, the

¶24

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

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/6

¶26

Crl.M.P.No.14727 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1096 of 2022

¶27

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

¶28

5. It is the case of the prosecution that suspecting that the deceased had illicit relationship with the petitioner's wife, the petitioner attacked the deceased with wooden log on 20.01.2014 at about 9 P.M. in the house where the petitioner's wife and the petitioner were staying, which happened to be the house of the petitioner's mother in law. It is the further case of the prosecution that the deceased died next day morning at 4 A.M.

¶29

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that P.W.1 and P.W.3 could not be the eye witnesses and that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Even according to the prosecution, the alleged occurrence took place due to the grave and sudden provocation and that the petitioner is in custody since 01.08.2018 and hence, he prayed for suspension of sentence.

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/6

¶31

¶32

Crl.M.P.No.14727 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1096 of 2022

¶33

7. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that

¶34

the occurrence took place in the house where the petitioner lived and therefore, the prosecution has established all the circumstances which points out towards the petitioner and hence, opposed for suspension of sentence.

¶35

8. We have perused the records carefully and considered the rival submissions.

¶36

9. According to the prosecution, the deceased had come to the house of the petitioner. Even D.W.1 - mother in law of the petitioner and D.W.2 - wife of the petitioner, have spoken about the earlier attack made by the deceased on the accused and about the attempt made by the deceased to take the wife of the petitioner out of the house. Admittedly, the petitioner is in custody since 01.08.2018.

¶37

10. Considering all the relevant facts and the period of incarceration served by the petitioner and the fact that the appeal is not likely to be taken up in the near future, we are inclined to suspend the sentence.

¶38

11. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands allowed

¶39

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

¶40

Crl.M.P.No.14727 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1096 of 2022

¶41

and the sentence imposed on the petitioner/accused is suspended on the following conditions:-

¶42

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-, with two sureties each, of whom, one should be a blood relative, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Attur;

¶43

(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 and mobile numbers to ensure their identity;

¶44

(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.

¶45

(M.S.R, J.) (S.M, J.) 19.02.2024

¶46

Index: Yes/No Sni Note: Issue Order Copy on 20.02.2024

¶47

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

¶48

Crl.M.P.No.14727 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1096 of 2022

¶49

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

¶50

Sni

¶51

¶52

1.The Principal Sessions Judge, Salem.

¶53

2.The Judicial Magistrate No.2, Attur.

¶54

3.The Inspector of Police, Veeraganaur Circle, Veeraganaur, Salem District, Gengavalli Police Station.

¶55

4.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.

¶56

5.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶57

Crl.M.P.No.14727 of 2022 in Crl.A.No.1096 of 2022

¶58

19.02.2024

¶59

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

Rajagopal v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajagopal 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

Vanniya Raja Vs the State Represented by Its

J.Natarajan Vs State Rep.by

A.Abdul Siddiq @ Abt Siddiq Vs The State Rep by its

Veni Vs the Inspector of Police

Pandi @ Rajapandi Vs State Rep by

S.Rajkumar Vs State Rep.by