Disposed

V. Ponner @ Ponnusamy v. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police

Madras HC18 Sept 2025CRL MP(MD)/12654/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner convicted under Section 326 IPC sought relaxation of the condition of daily appearance before the Magistrate imposed when his sentence was suspended pending criminal revision. The Court noted compliance and that he was the sole breadwinner, modified the condition to appearance once a month on the first working day and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Condition of daily appearance relaxed to monthly appearance before the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai; other conditions unaltered.

V. Ponner @ Ponnusamy Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The… — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CRL MP(MD) NO. 12654 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18-09-2025

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED

¶4

CRL MP(MD) NO. 12654 of 2025

¶5

V.Ponner @ Ponnusamy S/o.Veramalai, Kosur Kaspa, Kosur Post, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District.

¶6

Petitioner(s)

¶7

¶8

The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police, Thogamalai Police Station, Karur District.

¶9

Respondent(s)

¶10

Prayer:

¶11

To relax the condition imposed in Crl.M.P.No.10015/2025 in Crl.R.C.(MD).No. 956/2025 on 30.07.2025.

¶12

For Petitioner(s):

¶13

Mr.R.Rajaraman

¶14

For Respondent(s):

¶15

Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.side)

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is filed to relax the condition imposed on the petitioner in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.10015 of 2025 in Crl.R.C.(MD) No.956 of 2025, dated 30.07.2025.

¶18

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

¶19

2.Heard Mr.R.Rajaraman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent.

¶20

3.The short facts of the case, which are necessary for disposal of the present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, are as follows:-

¶21

i) Due to previous enmity regarding land dispute between the petitioner's family and defacto complainant's family, on 14.09.2019 at about 08.30 a.m., the petitioner/first accused along with others abused the defacto complainant's family by using filthy language and attacked them by using iron rod and caused injuries. Hence, an FIR came to be registered in Crime No.191 of 2019. After the investigation, a final report has been filed by the respondent Police for the offence under Sections 294(b), 323, 326 & 506(2) of IPC and the case was taken on file in C.C.No.110 of 2019 by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai. During trial, the prosecution has examined 7 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.7 and 11 documents were marked as exhibits as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.11. The petitioner has neither adduced oral nor documentary evidence.

¶22

ii) 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 03.03.2023 convicting the petitioner for the offences under Section 326 and sentenced him to undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to undergo 2 weeks simple imprisonment. Challenging the above said conviction and

¶23

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

¶24

sentence, the petitioner has preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.68 of 2023 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Karur. The learned District and Sessions Judge, Karur by confirming the conviction and sentence, dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred the present Criminal Revision Case.

¶25

4.The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, while admitting the Criminal Revision Case, vide order dated 30.07.2025, had ordered suspension of sentence in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.10015 of 2025 in Crl.R.C.(MD) No.956 of 2025, with the following directions:-

¶26

“ (i) The petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on him executing 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 Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai;

¶27

(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

¶28

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court at 10.30 a.m. on all working days until further orders. ”

¶29

5.Today, when the matter is being taken up, Mr.R.Rajaraman, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been complying with the conditions imposed in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.10015 of 2025 in Crl.R.C.(MD) No.956 of 2025, dated 30.07.2025, without fail. It was further submitted that the petitioner is the only breadwinner of his

¶30

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

¶31

family and is doing agricultural work as well as coolie work on daily wage basis. Thus, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays this Court that the condition No.(iii) of the order dated 30.07.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.10015 of 2025 in Crl.R.C.(MD) No. 956 of 2025 imposed on the petitioner may be relaxed and the petitioner may be directed to appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai, once in a month.

¶32

6.Mr.M.Karunanithi, learned counsel for the respondent fairly submits that the petitioner has been complying with the conditions imposed in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.10015 of 2025 in Crl.R.C.(MD) No.956 of 2025, dated 30.07.2025 regularly. However, he submits that the conditions imposed in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.10015 of 2025 in Crl.R.C.(MD) No.956 of 2025, dated 30.07.2025, are justified and made objection for relaxing the condition No. (iii) of the order dated 30.07.2025.

¶33

7.Accordingly, after considering the arguments as advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.10015 of 2025 in Crl.R.C.(MD) No.956 of 2025, dated 30.07.2025 and after perusal of the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the prayer made for relaxation of condition No.(iii) of the order dated 30.07.2025 and also considering the fact that the petitioner is the only breadwinner of his family, this Court is inclined to relax the condition No.(iii) of the order dated 30.07.2025 passed in Crl.M.P. (MD) No.10015 of 2025 in Crl.R.C.(MD) No.956 of 2025 as follows:-

¶34

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

¶35

“The petitioner shall appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I,

¶36

Kulithalai, once in a month with effect from October, 2025., ie., on the first working day of Every English Calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.”

¶37

Rest of the conditions imposed in Crl.M.P.(MD) No.10015 of 2025 in Crl.R.C. (MD) No.956 of 2025, dated 30.07.2025 are unaltered.

¶38

8.With the above modification, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is finally disposed of.

18-09-2025

1.Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai

¶43

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Thogamalai Police Station, Karur District.

¶44

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

V. Ponner @ Ponnusamy v. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V. Ponner @ Ponnusamy v. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jeyakumar Vs The State of Tamilnadu

R.Sathish Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Balashanmugam Vs Sumathi

Arulselvan Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Arumugam Vs Kalaiselvi

Mohammed Yasar Arafath Vs The State of Tamil Nadu