Suspension of sentence can be granted considering incarceration period, pending appeal and arguable points.

O R D E R

The petitioner / accused in Spl.CC.No.57 of 2020, on the file of the Special Court under POCSO Act Cases, Tirunelveli was found guilty by the trial Court, convicted and sentenced as follows:

- to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, i/d to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months for the offence u/s.11 r/w 12 of POCSO Act;

- to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, i/d to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months for the offence u/s 452 IPC; and - to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for the offence u/s. 506(i) IPC;

- to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for the offence u/s. 341 IPC;

As against the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court, the petitioner has filed a Criminal Appeal in Crl.A(MD)No.1071 of 2025 and the same was admitted by this Court on 28.11.2025. Along with the appeal the petitioner filed this petition to suspend the sentence imposed on him.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there are inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence of the witnesses. The complaint is a fabricated and afterthought document and the same is prepared by the police in order to falsely implicate the accused in this case. The victim stated that they have informed the police over phone, but they did not turn up for investigation, whereas the complaint was lodged on the next day of the occurrence, which creates doubt on the credibility of the complaint. He further submits that mere expressing the love without accompanying sexual conduct does not amount to sexual intent. He also submits that the petitioner is in jail for than four months, when he is punished for one year imprisonment.

3.The learned Government Advocate submits that the victim was

14 years at the time of occurrence and the petitioner was 30 years old.

The trial court has considered all the point raised by the petitioner.

4.This court has considered the rival submissions.

5.The petitioner has raised certain arguable points which can be appreciated during final hearing of the appeal. However, the appeal could not be taken up for want of time. Considering that the appeal could not be taken up immediately for want of time and the petitioner's period of incarceration, this court is inclined to allow this petition.

6.Accordingly this petition is allowed and the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended pending disposal of the criminal appeal on the following conditions: