IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 03.07.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED Crl.MP.No.24879 of 2025 in Crl.RC.No.2888 of 2025 Kannabiran Petitioner Vs State by the Inspector of Police, Thalavai Police Station, Ariyalur District. Respondent Prayer: suspend the conviction and sentence made in Crl.A.No.01 of 2024 vide order dated 10.12.2025 on the file of the learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ariyalur by confirming the judgment made in C.C.No.68 of 2021 on 29.11.2023 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Sendurai, and enlarge the petitioner on bail, pending disposal of the Criminal Revision Case 2888 of 2025. For Revision Petitioner : Mrs.Divya, for Mr.M.R.Elavarasan For Respondent :Mr. M.M.I. Khaleel, Govt. Advocate (crl.side) ORDER https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed, by the Revision Petitioner, praying to suspend the sentence, imposed on the Revision Petitioner in Crl.A.No.01 of 2024 vide order dated 10.12.2025 on the file of the learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ariyalur by confirming the judgment made in C.C.No.68 of 2021 on 29.11.2023 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Sendurai, and enlarge the petitioner on bail, pending disposal of the Criminal Revision Case 2888 of 2025. By the impugned judgement of conviction and sentence and order of the Trial Court, the Revision Petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offences as follows: Petitioner Conviction Sentence A1 u/s.294(b)IPC Rs.1000/- u/s.325 IPC To undergo SI for one year and a fine of Rs.5000/-, in default, to undergo 2 months SI u/s.506(ii) To undergo SI for 3 months 2. The impugned 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. 3. Challenging the above said judgement of conviction and sentence and order of the lower appellate court, the Revision Petitioner has filed the above Criminal https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Revision Case, along with the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, seeking suspension of sentence and bail. 4. This Court heard Mrs.Divya, the learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. M.M.I. Khalee, Govt. Advocate (crl.side) for the Respondent and considered their submissions and also perused materials placed before this Court. 5. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/A1 along with other accused is alleged to have went to the house of the defacto complainant and assaulted him with a wooden log and also threatened him with dire consequences. Both the courts below have failed to appreciate the evidence of PW1 to PW4 and failed to note that each witness is spoken differently with regard to occurrences. 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. 6. 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 Petitioner has a fair chance of success in this Criminal Revision Case. Thus, the learned https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis counsel for the Revision Petitioner has prayed for suspension of sentence and bail, till the disposal of this Criminal Revision Petition. 7. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the Revision Petitioner 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 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. 8. The learned Govt. Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the Respondent has opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner 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 Petitioner, at this stage, be refused by this Court. 9. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner as well as the learned Govt. Advocate (crl.side) appearing 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, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis without considering the entire materials placed before it and during the Trial, the Revision Petitioner was also on bail. 10. Further, it is observed that when the accused have been under incarceration for some time 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. 11. The Revision Petitioner has 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 Petitioner is entitled to the relief of suspension of sentence and bail. 12. Accordingly, pending the Criminal Revision Case, the relief of suspension of sentence and bail is granted to Revision Petitioner, namely, Kannabiran on the following conditions:- i. The Revision Petitioner shall surrender before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Senthurai within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such surrender, the Revision Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond, along with two sureties for a sum of Rs.15,000/- each and subject to furnishing an undertaking that he will co-operate in the hearing of the present Revision. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ii. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ii. The Revision Petitioner 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. iii. The realization of fine, if any, shall also remain suspended during the pendency of the present Revision. iv. The Revision Petitioner shall appear before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Senthurai once in every month, ie., on the first working day, commencing from the month of August 2026, at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. 13. On acceptance of his bail bonds and sureties, the Trial Court shall transmit photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on records of this Revision. 14. With the above directions, this petition is ordered. 03.07.2026 Index:Yes/No Web:Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking Neutral Citation msr To 1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Senthurai 2. The Addl. District Court, Ariyalur 3. The Inspector of Police, Thalavai Police Station, Ariyalur District. 4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis SHAMIM AHMED, J. msr Crl.MP.No.24879 of 2025 in Crl.RC.No.2888 of 2025 03.07.2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis