Madras High Court
Chitra vs The Inspector Of Police on 11 December, 2023
Author: S.S.Sundar
Bench: S.S.Sundar
Crl.M.P.No.2910 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.186 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.12.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
Crl.M.P.No.2910 of 2023
in Crl.A.No.186 of 2023
Chitra
W/o Sakthi .. Petitioner
-vs-
The Inspector of Police
K.R.B. Dam Police Station
Krishnagiri District
(Crime No.30 of 2018) .. Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 389(1) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure to suspend the sentence imposed in S.C.No.8 of
2019 dated 06.12.2022 by the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila
Court, Krishnagiri and enlarge the petitioner on bail, pending disposal of the
above appeal.
For Petitioner :: Mr.P.Muthamizh Selvakumar
For Respondent :: Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan
Additional Public Prosecutor
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.1/6
Crl.M.P.No.2910 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.186 of 2023
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by SUNDER MOHAN, J.)
The petitioner, who was tried as Accused No.3 in S.C.No.8 of 2019
on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court,
Krishnagiri, stands convicted for the offence under Sections 294(b) and 323
of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months and to
pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one
month for the offence under Section 294(b) of IPC and to undergo simple
imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to
undergo 3 months simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 323
of IPC, which are ordered to run concurrently, vide the judgment dated
06.12.2022 passed by the trial Court. Challenging the said conviction and
sentence, the petitioner has filed the above appeal along with A1 & A2, who
were convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for the offences as
stated therein. The present miscellaneous petition has been filed to suspend
the sentence and enlarge the petitioner on bail, pending the above appeal.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused and the de-facto
complainant are relatives; that the deceased is the wife of the brother of the
first accused; that there were land disputes between the two families and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.2910 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.186 of 2023
there were frequent quarrels due to the said dispute; that on 14.02.2018 at
about 7.30 p.m., while the deceased was standing in front of his newly
constructed house with the de-facto complainant, A1 & A2 abused the
deceased in filthy language and then attacked her with wooden logs and that
the deceased succumbed to the said injuries. It is also the case of
prosecution that A3 (petitioner) had attacked the eye-witness, P.W.2 with a
wooden log.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner
is the daughter-in-law of the first accused and the wife of the second
accused and she has been falsely implicated only due to the previous enmity
between the two families.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, per contra, submitted
that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and that
the trial Court, after scrutinizing the evidence of the prosecution witnesses
with supporting documents, has rightly convicted the petitioner for the
offence as aforesaid and hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition.
5. We find from the evidence of the witnesses that there is no overtact
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.2910 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.186 of 2023
attributed to the petitioner as regards the offence of murder. The petitioner is
said to have attacked P.W.2, a victim with a wooden log. Considering the
overtact attributed against the petitioner, a lady and the fact that false
implication of A3 cannot be ruled out in the facts of this case, we are
inclined to suspend the sentence.
6. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands allowed
and the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner is
suspended and she is granted bail on the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
twenty five thousand only) with two sureties, of whom one should be
a blood relative, each for a likesum, to the satisfaction of the learned
Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Krishnagiri.
(ii)The sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression
in the surety bond and the learned Sessions Judge may obtain a copy
of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book and mobile numbers to
ensure their identity; and
(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 she is not able to appear before the trial Court on any day, she shall
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.2910 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.186 of 2023
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 her absence, as directed by the trial Court.
(S.S.S.R.,J.) (S.M.,J.)
11.12.2023
ss
To
1. The Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Krishnagiri
2. The Inspector of Police, K.R.B.Dam Police Station, Krishnagiri District
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.2910 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.186 of 2023
S.S.SUNDAR, J.
AND
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
ss
11.12.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
