Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 75745 (MAD)

Santhakumar v. The State Rep by, Inspector of Police,

CRL MP/13962/2025 · 2025-07-17

G K Ilanthiraiyan

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Crl.M.P.No.13962 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.982 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.07.2025 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.M.P.No.13962 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.982 of 2025 1.Santhakumar 2.Kala 3.Bhupesh ...Petitioners Vs. The State Rep By Inspector of Police Kumarapalayam Police Station, Namakkal District. (Cr No. 282/2019) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 374 of Criminal Procedure Code/Section 415 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to set aside conviction and sentence imposed in Judgment dated 30.06.2025 made in S.C.No.14/2022 on the file of II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchengode by allowing this Criminal Appeal and acquit the accused. For Petitioners : Mr.A.Padmanabhan For Respondent : Mr.S.Raja Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.No.13962 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.982 of 2025 ORDER This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking suspension of sentence imposed by the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchengode in S.C.No.14 of 2022 vide judgment dated 30.06.2025. 2. The petitioners are the accused in S.C.No.14 of 2022 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchengode in S.C.No.14 of 2022. They were found guilty of the offences under Section 304(ii) r/w 34 of I.P.C and have been convicted and sentenced as under: Rank of the accused Conviction under Section Sentence awarded A-1 304(ii) of IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years. A-2 & A-3 304(ii) r/w 34 of I.P.C to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent. Page 2 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.No.13962 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.982 of 2025 4. A perusal of the records reveal that the deceased is none other than the own brother of A-1. A-2 is the brother-in-law and A-3 is the son of A-1 & A-2. All three accused went into house of the deceased asking for their share. The A-3 caught hold the deceased and A-1 attacked on his scrotal by hands as well as by his legs. Further, they also kicked him and as such, he suddenly fell down and sustained grievous injuries. That apart he sustained injuries in his throat. The A-2 also had repeated beaten the deceased. Even the mother of the deceased who is the eye witness categorically deposed as follows:- “eh';fs; tPl;ow;Fs; ,Ue;jnghnj vjpupfs; rhe;jFkhu;. fyh. g[{ngc&; Mfpa K:tUk; tPl;ow;Fs; te;jdu;/ mjpy; 2k; vjpup vdJ kfs;/ Kjy; vjpup rhe;jFkhu; vdJ kUkfd;/ 3k; vjpup g[{ngc&; vdJ ngud; Mthu;/ vdJ jhahu; tPl;oy; vdf;F 30 yl;rk; U:gha; gzk; vdf;F ehd; vdJ eiffis vdJ mk;kh tPl;oy; bfhLj;jpUe;jjw;fhf rPu; gzkhf bfhLj;jpUe;jdu;/ ehd; 2 kfs;fSf;Fk; jyh 5 yl;rk; bfhLf;fyhk; vd;W ,Ue;njd;/ mjdhy; rk;gt rkak; vjpupfs; K:tUk; te;jtu;fs; eP cdJ bgupa kfSf;nf vy;yhtw;iwa[k; bfhLf;fpwha; vd;W tHf;fpd; 2k; vjpup fyh Twpdhu;/ Kjypy; 2k; vjpup vdJ rPiyahy; fGj;ij Rw;wp ,Uf;fpdhu;/ gpwF vd;id fd;dk; fd;dkhf miwe;jhu;/ gpwF K:d;W ngUk; vd;id tpl;Ltpl;L vdJ kfd; gHdpntiy gpoj;Jf;bfhz;lhu;fs;/ K:tUk; fd;dk; fd;dkhf vdJ kfid moj;jdu;/ gpwF kfid fPnH js;sp 1k; vjpup rhe;jFkhu; capu;ehoia gpoj;Jf;bfhz;L ,Gj;jhu;/ 2k; vjpup fyh https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.No.13962 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.982 of 2025 rPtfl;ilahy; moj;jhu;/ gpwF gHdpntiy ifahy; ,oj;jdu;/ gpwF capu;ehoia gpoj;J ,Gj;jhy; gHdpnty; gLf;ifapy; ngha; gLj;Jtpl;lhu;/ mk;kh vdf;F kaf;fkhf tUfpwJ vd;whu;/ jdJ fGj;jpy; ,Ue;j f';fpypia fhztpy;iy vd;whu;/ ehd; vLj;J itj;jpUf;fpnwd; vd;W Twpndd;/” “ 5. Therefore, the specific allegations are as against the appellants and they failed to make out a prima-facie case. Hence, this Court finds no reasons to suspend the sentence since the Trial Court has gone through the evidence in its entirety and also finds that the petitioner had brutally attacked the deceased thereby causing death. 6. In the result, the petition for suspension of sentence is dismissed. 17.07.2025 (2/2) Index : Yes/No Neutral citation : Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order Nhs https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.No.13962 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.982 of 2025 To 1. The learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruchengode. 2. The Judicial Magistrate, Kumarapalayam. 3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem 4. The Superintendent, Central Prison (Women Cell) Coimbatore. 5. The Inspector of Police Kumarapalayam Police Station, Namakkal District. 6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.No.13962 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.982 of 2025 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. Nhs Crl.M.P.No.13962 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.982 of 2025 17.07.2025 (2/2) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.No.13962 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.982 of 2025 Crl.A.No.982 of 2025 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. Admit. 2. Mr.S.Raja Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor takes notice for the respondent. 3. Registry is directed to call for the records from the lower Court and prepare typed set of papers. 17.07.2025 (½) Nhs https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis