Thulasidas @ Babu vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 2486 Ker

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                    PRESENT
                  THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
             Friday, the 4th day of March 2022 / 13th Phalguna, 1943

                  CRL.M.APPL.NO.1/2022 IN CRL.A NO. 87 OF 2022

  SESSIONS CASE NO.111/2018 OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT-1, KALPETTA,
                                 WAYANAD.

PETITIONER/APPELLANT

        THULASIDAS @ BABU, S/O LOKESAN NAIR,AGED 41/2017, KAVUVAYAL VEEDU,
        THERVADIKKUNNU, KANIYAMBETTA VILLAGE, KANIYAMBETTA P.O., WAYANAD -
        673121.

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

        STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
        KERALA.


     Application praying that in the circumstances stated therein
the High Court be pleased to suspend the sentence passed against the
petitioner pending disposal of the above Crl.Appeal.




     This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and upon hearing the arguments of M/S NIRMAL V NAIR, M.ANEESH, RAHUL
S.NATH, Advocates for the petitioners and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
respondent, the court passed the following:




P.T.O
                    Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J
             -------------------------------
                         Crl.A.No.87/2022
            -------------------------------
               Dated this the 4th day of March, 2022
            --------------------------------

                             ORDER

Crl.M.A.No.1/2022

This is an application to suspend the execution of

sentence.

2. The petitioner/appellant has been convicted for the

offences punishable under Sections 366 and 376(2)(n) of IPC.

He is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period

of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- under Section

376(2) of IPC and also to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3

years and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- under Section 366 of

IPC.

3. I have heard Sri. Nirmal V. Nair, the learned counsel

for the petitioner and Smt. Sheeba Thomas, the learned Public

Prosecutor.

4. The learned Prosecutor strongly opposed the

application. The Prosecutor has also filed a detailed objection.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the evidence on records would clearly shows that the alleged

sexual act was consensual. The learned counsel further Crl.M.A.No.1/22 in Crl.A.87/22

pointed out various infirmities in the impugned judgment.

Those are all matters to be considered during the final hearing

of the appeal. The petitioner is in custody since 19.11.2021.

He has also undergone custody for 60 days during the crime

stage. Considering the pendency of cases here, there is no

likelihood of disposing of the appeal in the near future. Hence,

I am of the view that the execution of sentence can be

suspended.

Accordingly, the execution of sentence shall stand

suspended on condition that the petitioner executes a bond for

Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh), with two solvent sureties for

the like sum each, to the satisfaction of the court below and on

further condition that the petitioner deposits the entire fine

amount within one month.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE

kp

04-03-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar