VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2025 › High Court of Madras

Arunjunaimuthu @ Muthu v. State by Inspector of Police

ALLOWED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
21 August 2025
Bench
M.S. Ramesh, V. Lakshminarayanan
Case no.
CRL MP 4535/2025

Follow Madras High CourtFollow M.S. RameshFollow V. Lakshminarayanan

Judgment

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by M.S.Ramesh J.) This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur on 02.11.2022 in S.C.No.127 of 2021 and release him on bail pending disposal of the appeal.

¶2The learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur in S.C.No.127 of 2021 by his judgment dated 02.11.2022, convicted the petitioner and sentenced him as follows:- Accused Offence Sentence imposed Accused U/s.302 of IPC To undergo LIFE IMPRISONMENT and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, to undergo RI for three months. Period of detention already undergone is ordered to be set off u/s.428 of Cr.P.C.

¶3Challenging the above conviction and sentence, the petitioner has filed the above Criminal Appeal along with the present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition seeking suspension of sentence and enlarge him on bail pending disposal of the criminal appeal.

¶4Heard Mr.J.Franklin, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. A. Damodaran, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.M.Karthikeyan appearing for the respondent/Police.

¶5It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased had earlier mocked and ridiculed the accused. Consequently on 23.02.2020 at about 03.45 p.m., the accused challenged the deceased and abused him in front of others, which lead to a quarrel. At this point, the accused pushed the deceased down and assaulted him indiscriminately with a rock, owing to which, the deceased died on the spot due to head injuries

¶6The prosecution had projected PW1 to PW4 as eye witnesses to the occurrence. However, PW3 and PW4 were treated as hostile witnesses. As far as the oral testimonies of PW1 and PW2 are concerned, there appears to be certain material contradictions. According to PW1, the occurrence had taken place around 3.45 p.m, while PW2 places the occurrence at around 2 p.m. Likewise, the rock which was alleged to be used by the accused to kill the deceased has been described as a hollow block by PW1, while PW2 terms it as a rock. This apart, the occurrence appears to have arisen out of a sudden wordy quarrel and there are also material contradictions between the evidence of PW1 and PW2 in respect of the weapon that was alleged to be used to assault the accused. On a prima facie view, the petitioner may have a good chance of success in the appeal, in the light of the material contradictions in the oral testimonies of PW1 and PW2.

¶7We have taken into account that the accused is under incarceration for more than three years, and since the appeal may not be taken up for final disposal in the near future, we are inclined to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner pending disposal of the appeal.

¶8Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands allowed and the sentence imposed on the petitioner is suspended on the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with two sureties each, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur.

(ii) The petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the trial Court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book and mobile numbers to ensure their identity;

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on the first working day of every month at 10.30 a.m., until the disposal of the appeal and if he is not able to appear before the trial Court on any day, he shall make arrangements to file an application under Section 317 Cr.P.C. and shall appear before the trial Court on any other day in lieu of the date of his absence, as directed by the trial Court. [M.S.R, J.] [V.L.N.,J.]

21.08.2025 Index: Yes/No msr Note: Issue Order Copy on 25.08.2025 To

1.The Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Komanaicken Police Station, Tiruppur.

¶3The Superintendent of Police, Central Prison, Coimbatore

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. CRLeMPeNo.e4535eofe2025 M.S.RAMESHoJ. & V.LAKSHMINARAYANANoJ. msr CRLoMPoNo.o4535oofo2025oin Crl.A,.No.1123oofo2024 21-08-2025

Case details

Parties and counsel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21-08-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN CRL MP No. 4535 of 2025 in Crl.A,.No.1123 of 2024 Arunjunaimuthu @ Muthu S/o.Shanmugavel, No.21/24, Kandhasamy Street, Salamadu, Ambathur, Salapuram, Chennai-600 054. Petitioner(s) Vs State By Inspector Of Police Komanaicken Police Station, Tiruppur Crime No. 37 Of 2020 Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under section 430(1) of BNSS to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner in S.C.No. 127 of 2021 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Tiruppur date 2.11.2022 and release the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the above criminal appeal and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case and thus render Justice. For Petitioner(s): J.Franklin For Respondent(s): A. Damodaran, Addl. Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr.M.Karthikeyan

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.