Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 29971

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J
Sanjeevalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by the Sub Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Virudhunagar District – Respondent
CRL OP(MD).No.7037 of 2026 | Crl.A.No.160 of 2025 | C.C.No.14 of 2011 | Crl.M.P.No.35808 of 2025

Advocates:
For Petitioner: Mr.K.Althaf Sheriff for M/s.Ajmal Associates
For Respondents: Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor

Application for stay of conviction is maintainable and must be numbered and decided on merits.

Headnote:Under Section 528 of BNSS, the petitioner challenged a docket order rejecting an unnumbered application for stay of conviction in a criminal appeal. The petitioner was convicted in C.C.No.14 of 2011 and appealed in Crl.A.No.160 of 2025, where suspension of sentence was granted but stay of conviction was refused without numbering. The court found such applications maintainable per Supreme Court precedents. Issues framed: maintainability of stay of conviction applications in appellate courts. Ratio: Docket orders rejecting without numbering are improper; applications must be numbered and decided on merits. Criminal Original Petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. petition challenges rejection of unnumbered stay of conviction application. (Para 1 , 2)
2. counsel cites sc judgments affirming maintainability of stay applications. (Para 3)
3. court sets aside docket order, directs numbering and merits disposal. (Para 4 , 5)

ORDER

The present petition has been filed by the accused/appellant in Crl.A.No.160 of 2025 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court, Virudhunagar, seeking to set aside the docket order in the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, whereby the application filed by the petitioner seeking stay of her conviction was rejected without even being numbered.

2. The petitioner suffered an order of conviction in C.C.No.14 of

2011 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar. Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No.160 of 2025 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.35808 of 2025 seeking suspension of sentence, and the same was allowed on 01.11.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner filed the present application seeking to stay the conviction. The said application was rejected by way of a docket order without numbering it. Challenging the same, the present petition has been filed.

3. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, in view of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in CDJ 2025 SC 674, CDJ 2023 SC 1157, and CDJ 2024 SC 187, an application seeking stay of conviction is maintainable. Therefore, he prays that the application may be numbered and decided on merits by the learned First Appellate Court.

4. Considering the above said facts, the docket order in the unnumbered Crl.M.P.No. of 2025 in Crl.A.No.160 of 2025 stands set aside, and the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar, is directed to number the said application and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law.

5. With the said observations, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document