S. Rahul Vs The State of Tamilnadu, rep by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Musiri Sub Division

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 430 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to suspend the sentence and conviction imposed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Tiruchirappalli dated 21.11.2025 made in SplSC.No.27 of 2024.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramsundarvijayraj For Respondent : Mr.AS.Abul Kalaam Aazad, No.1 Government Advocate For Respondent : Mr.G.Ravishankar, No.2 Legal Aid Counsel

¶16

1/6

¶17

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

¶18

CrlMP(MD)No.20559 of 2025

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioners are accused Nos.3 and 4 in SplSC.No.27 of 2025 on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR), Tiruchirappalli. They were tried along with other accused, the petitioners have been found guilty, convicted and sentenced to undergo two years imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo two month simple imprisonment, for the offence under Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act and sentenced to

¶21

undergo one year imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default, to under got one month simple imprisonment for the offence under Sections 323 IPC (two counts) and Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act . As against the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court, the petitioners have filed an appeal before this Court in Crl.A(MD)No.1381 of 2025 and the same has been admitted by this Court. The petitioners along with the appeal have also moved this petition to suspend the sentence.

¶22

2/6

¶23

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

¶24

CrlMP(MD)No.20559 of 2025

¶25

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits the trial court

¶26

has not appreciated the evidence of the witnesses in a proper manner and there are several contradictory statements among the witnesses as against the petitioner. The trial court has passed the order of conviction only on presumption. The trial court has granted suspension of sentence and it has also been extended by this court periodically.

¶27

3.The learned Government Advocate and the learned Legal Aid counsel raised their objections to allow this petition.

¶28

4.This court considered the rival submissions made and

¶29

perused the material placed on record.

¶30

5.The petitioners have raised certain arguable points in this petition, which can be considered only during the final hearing of the appeal. However the appeal could not be taken up for final hearing for want of time. Therefore this Court is inclined to allow this petition.

¶31

3/6

¶32

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

¶33

CrlMP(MD)No.20559 of 2025

¶34

6.Accordingly this petition is allowed and the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioners alone is suspended pending disposal of the criminal appeal on the following conditions:

¶35

(i) The petitioners are ordered to be

¶36

enlarged on bail on executing a bond for Rs.25,000/-

¶37

(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge (PCR Cases), Trichy.

¶38

(ii) The petitioners shall file an affidavit

¶39

before the respondent police that they will not misuse this liberty and will not indulge in any further offence.

¶40

(iii) The petitioners shall report before the

¶41

trial court on the first working day of every month.

¶42

(iv) If the petitioners violate any of the

¶43

conditions, the respondent police shall move an