Velmurugan Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police

Prayer: To suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the judgment, dated 20.04.2026, passed in CA.No.25 of 2025 on the file of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore at Virudhachalam, confirming the order of Judicial Magistrate Court Tittagudi in CC.no.103 of 2018, dated 28.06.2024 and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the Main Criminal Revision and thus render justice.

¶15

For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Karuppaiyamooppanar

¶16

For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Dinesh, GA (Criminal Side)

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed, by the Revision Petitioners, praying to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the

¶19

Page1 of 8

¶20

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

¶21

CRL MP No. 9695 of 2026

¶22

judgment, dated 20.04.2026, passed in CA.No.25 of 2025 on the file of the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore at Virudhachalam, confirming the order of Judicial Magistrate Court Tittagudi in CC.no.103 of 2018, dated 28.06.2024 and to enlarge the Petitioner on bail, till the disposal of the instant Criminal Revision Case.

¶23

By the impugned judgement of conviction and sentence and order of the Trial Court, the 1^st Petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 324 of IPC to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo one month Simple Imprisonment and the 2^nd Petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 323 of IPC to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo one month Simple Imprisonment. The impugned judgement judgement of conviction and sentence and order of the Trial Court was confirmed by the lower appellate Court, by its impugned judgement of conviction and sentence and order.

¶24

Challenging the above said judgement of conviction and sentence and order of the lower appellate court, the Revision Petitioners have filed the above Criminal Revision Case, along with the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, seeking suspension of sentence and bail.

¶25

This Court heard Mr.K.Karuppaiyamooppanar, the learned counsel for the Petitioners and Mr.M.Dinesh, the Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the Respondent and considered their submissions and also perused materials

¶26

Page2 of 8

¶27

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

¶28

CRL MP No. 9695 of 2026

¶29

placed before this Court.

¶30

The learned counsel for the Petitioners has submitted that the investigation was not conducted in a fair and proper manner and that the entire case is nothing but an exaggerated version of mere internal family quarrel that happened between the brothers and that both the courts below have failed to consider the entire evidence, in a proper and perspective manner and that the judgments passed by both the Courts below were based on surmises and conjectures, without considering the entire evidence on record.

¶31

It is further argued that due to pendency of the criminal cases before this High Court, there is a blinking chance that in the near future, this Criminal Revision Case will be finally heard and decided. It is further submitted that there are arguable points in this Criminal Revision Case and the Revision Petitioners have a fair chance of success in this Criminal Revision Case. Thus, the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner shas prayed for suspension of sentence and bail, till the disposal of this Criminal Revision Petition.

¶32

Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the Revision Petitioners have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the Revision Petitioner that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available

¶33

Page3 of 8

¶34

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

¶35

CRL MP No. 9695 of 2026

¶36

before the Court, whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions, which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. The Revision Petitioner undertakes that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in disposal of Revision.

¶37

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the Respondent has opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners and submits that the judgements passed by the Courts below are as per the law, after considering the entire evidence and thus, the relief sought by the Revision Petitioners, at this stage, be refused by this Court.

¶38

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioners as well as the learned Govt. Advocate (Criminal Side) for the Respondent, this Court is of the view that both the courts below have failed to appreciate the evidence on record and the impugned judgments were passed, without considering the entire materials placed before it and during the Trial, the Revision Petitioners were also on bail.

¶39

10.Further, it is observed that when the accused have been under incarceration for sometime and when there are points in the Revision, which favour the accused, then the Courts should not shy from granting suspension of sentence, as the liberty of the individual would be at stake, if the revision results in acquittal at a later point of time. In this regard, the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Rabi Prakash Vs. The State of Odhisha reported in 2023 Live Law (SC) 533 is of relevance.

¶40

Page4 of 8

¶41

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

¶42

CRL MP No. 9695 of 2026

¶43

11.The Revision Petitioners raised substantial grounds in the Revision, which require detailed appraisal. Further, the Revision is not likely to be taken up in the near future. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the Revision Petitioners are entitled to the relief of suspension of sentence and bail.

¶44

12.Accordingly, pending the Criminal Revision Case, the relief of suspension of sentence and bail is granted to Revision Petitioners, namely, (1) Velmurugan, S/o.Raja and (2) Ramachandiran, S/o.Raja, on the following conditions:-

¶45

i. The Revision Petitioners shall surrender before the Judicial Magistrate, Tittagudi, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such surrender, the Revision Petitioners are ordered to be released on bail, on each of them executing a personal bond, along with two sureties for a sum of Rs.15,000/- each and subject to furnishing an undertaking that they will co-operate in the hearing of the present Revision.

¶46

ii. The Revision Petitioners and sureties shall affix their Photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the bond and the above said Court may obtain copies of their Aadhaar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

¶47

iii. The realization of fine, if any, shall also remain suspended during the pendency of the present Revision.

¶48

iv. The Revision Petitioners shall appear before the Judicial Magistrate, Tittagudi, once in every month, ie., on the first working day, commencing from the month of July 2026, at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶49