Dismissed

Deva v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC9 Dec 2025CRL MP(MD)/4241/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court rejected the petitioner's petition under Section 389(1) CrPC/Section 430 BNSS seeking to suspend sentence and grant bail pending the disposal of a criminal appeal. The bench held the petitioner failed to make out a prima facie case.

What did the court decide?

Petition to suspend sentence and enlarge petitioner on bail dismissed; case remanded for final hearing.

Deva Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Crl.M.P.(MD) No.4241 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 09.12.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R. POORNIMA

¶6

CRL.MP(MD) No.4241 of 2025 in Crl.A(MD)No.399 of 2025

¶7

Deva

¶8

: Petitioner/Appellant/A2

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Palani, Dindigul District. (Crime No.14 of 2023) : Respondent/Respondent/

¶11

Prayer: Petition filed under Section 389(l) of the Criminal Procedure Code r/w 430 of BNSS to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner/A2 passed by the Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act cases, Dindigul, in Special SC No.38 of 2024, dated 30/01/2025 and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the criminal appeal.

¶12

_____________ Page 1 of 4_

¶13

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

¶14

Crl.M.P.(MD) No.4241 of 2025

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian For Respondent : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

[Order of the Court was made by G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.]

¶18

This petition is filed seeking to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner/A2 passed by the Special Court for Trial of SC/ST (POA) Act cases, Dindigul, in Special SC No.38 of 2024, dated 30/01/2025 and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the criminal appeal.

¶19

2.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the

¶20

materials available on record.

¶21

3.The petitioner has failed to make out a prima facie case for grant of suspension of sentence, hence we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case for grant of suspension of sentence to the petitioner.

¶22

Page 2 of 4

¶23

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

¶24

Crl.M.P.(MD) No.4241 of 2025

¶25

4.Accordingly this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands

¶26

dismissed.

¶27

5.Post the criminal appeal in the usual course for final

¶28

hearing.

¶29

[G.K.I., J.] & [R.P., J.] 09.12.2025

¶30

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No er

¶31

To,

¶32

The Special Court for Trial of SC/ST( POA) Act cases, Dindigul

¶33

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Palani, Dindigul District.

¶34

3 The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶35

_____________ Page 3 of 4_

¶36

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

¶37

Crl.M.P.(MD) No.4241 of 2025

¶38

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN , J. AND R.POORNIMA, J.

¶39

¶40

CRL.MP(MD) No.4241 of 2025 in Crl.A(MD)No.399 of 2025

¶41

09.12.2025

¶42

_____________ Page 4 of 4_

¶43

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

Deva v. The State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deva v. The State of Tamilnadu

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

Ramaneeswari Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Govindaraj Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Ramar alias Jeyaramar Vs The State of Tamilnadu

The State of Tamilnadu Vs M/s. Sri Venkataramanasamy Blue Metals

Dhanasri Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

S.Kumar @ Pushpakumar Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Represented by its, The Deputy Inspector General of Prisons