S. Thiruvenkataramanujam Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Inspector of Police

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 438(1) B.N.S.S. praying to suspend the conviction and sentences imposed on the petitioners vide judgment dated 30.07.2025 passed in C.A.No.130 of 2024 on the file of the learned

¶17

1/7

¶18

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

¶19

CRL MP(MD) No.11399 of 2025

¶20

Additional District and Sessions Court, Aruppukottai, in confirming the judgement dated 24.09.2024 passed in C.C.No.11 of 2008 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Aruppukottai pending disposal of the above criminal revision petition.

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed to suspend the conviction and sentences imposed on the petitioners vide judgment dated 30.07.2025 passed in C.A.No.130 of 2024 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Court, Aruppukottai, in confirming the judgement dated 24.09.2024 passed in C.C.No.11 of 2008 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Aruppukottai pending disposal of the above criminal revision petition.

¶23

The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant borrowed a loan of Rs.50,000/- from the 1^st accused and he had given signed unfilled promissory notes and 8 signed cheques. As the 1^st accused demanded high interest, enmity arose between the 1^st accused and defacto complainant. Hence, the 1^st accused has filed 2 cheque cases before Judicial Magistrate Court, Sivakasi against defacto complainant. Furthermore, the 2^nd accused had filed 2 cheque cases against the defacto complainant. However, the defacto complainant was acquitted and appeal preferred

¶24

2/7

¶25

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

¶26

CRL MP(MD) No.11399 of 2025

¶27

by the 2^nd accused was also dismissed. Hence, defacto complainant filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukottai for taking necessary action against the 1^st and 2^nd accused. On the basis of the complaint received from the Judicial Magistrate Court, Aruppukottai, the respondent police has registered a case against 1^st and 2^nd accused in Crime No.566 of 2001.

¶28

The respondent police, after completing the investigation, has filed the final report against the 1^st and 2^nd accused under Sections 467, 468, 469, 471 and 120(b) of IPC and the case was taken on file in C.C.No.11 of 2008 and the same was pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukottai.

¶29

During trial, the prosecution has examined 8 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.8 and exhibited 7 documents. The accused have adduced neither oral nor documentary evidence.

¶30

The learned trial Judge, upon considering the evidence both oral and documentary and on hearing the arguments of both the sides, has passed a judgment dated 24.09.2024 convicting the petitioners/1^st and 2^nd accused for the offences under Section 468 and sentenced them to undergo 2 years simple

¶31

3/7

¶32

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

¶33

CRL MP(MD) No.11399 of 2025

¶34

imprisonment and Section 471 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo 2 years simple imprisonment. Challenging the above said conviction and sentence, the petitioners have preferred appeal in Crl.A.No.130 of 2024 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Aruppukottai. The learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Aruppukottai by confirming the conviction and sentence, dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have preferred the present Criminal Revision Case along with the above miscellaneous petition.

¶35

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that there are several infirmities in the prosecution case and further there are contradictions in material particulars between the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.

¶36

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that there are enough materials available on record against the petitioners and hence, he strongly opposed to grant suspension of sentence.

¶37

This Court has carefully considered the rival contentions putforth by either side and also perused the materials available on record.

¶38

4/7

¶39

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

¶40

CRL MP(MD) No.11399 of 2025

¶41

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners pointed out that certain infirmities and inconsistencies in this case and also certain contradictions in material particulars. The fact remains that there are arguable points involved in these criminal revision and further the criminal revision is not likely to be taken up for final hearing in the near future and as such, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners herein are entitled to the relief of grant of suspension of sentence.

¶42

In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is ordered. Accordingly, the relief of suspension of sentence is granted to the petitioners on the following conditions:-

¶43

(i) the petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukottai ;

¶44

(ii) 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; and

¶45

(iii) the petitioners shall appear before the trial Court at 10.30 a.m. on the first Monday of every English Calendar month until further

¶46

5/7

¶47

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

¶48

CRL MP(MD) No.11399 of 2025

¶49

orders.

¶50