Nithyanandham Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police

PRAYER : Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 389(1) r/w 439 of Cr.P.C., to suspend the sentence of imprisonment imposed in the judgment dated 21.04.2025 made in Spl.SC.No.106 of 2020 on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai and to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the above criminal appeal before this Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Dhansekar

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.S.Raja Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

Crl.MP.No.10055 of 2025

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed praying to suspend the sentence of imprisonment imposed in the judgment dated 21.04.2025 made in Spl.SC.No.106 of 2020 on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai and to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the above criminal appeal before this Court.

¶20

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner gave love torture to the victim and he also attempted to kill her. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under POCSO Act, Chennai, in Spl.SC.No.106 of 2020, vide judgment dated

¶21

21.04.2025, as follows:

¶22

Rank of the accused	Conviction under Section	Sentence awarded
Sole accused	Section 12 of POCSO Act	to undergo imprisonment for a period of 1 year and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month
	Section 8 r/w 18 of POCSO Act	to undergo imprisonment for a period of 2 ½ years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

Crl.MP.No.10055 of 2025

¶26

Rank of the accused	Conviction under Section	Sentence awarded
		one month
	Section 307 of IPC	to undergo imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months
3. Heard	the learned counse	l for the petitioner and the learned

¶27

Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

¶28

This Court finds no reasons to suspend the sentence since the

¶29

Trial Court has gone through the evidence in its entirety. Further, the petitioner gave love torture to the victim and he also attempted to do away the life of the victim by slitting the neck of the victim by using a knife.

¶30

Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this petition.

¶31