Advocates:
['M/S K SHANMUGAM', '', 'LEGAL AID COUNSEL', 'PUBLIC PROSECUTOR']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

Friday, the First day of February Two Thousand Nineteen

PRESENT

The Hon`ble Mr Justice V. PARTHIBAN

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.868 of 2019

in CRL A.No.787 of 2017

RAKESH [ PETITIONER /APPELLANT ]

Vs

STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ]

INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

D1 TRIPLICANE POLICE STATION,

CHENNAI.

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in

the Memorandum of Grounds in CRL A.No.787 of 2017 on the file of the

High Court, the High Court will be pleased to suspend the sentence

imposed against the petitioner in Special C.C.No.1/2016 on the file

of the learned Mahila Court/Special Court for case under POCSO Act /

Childrens Court, Chennai-104 and set aside the Judgment dated

05.10.2017 and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending diposal of the

above said CRL A.No.787 of 2017 [CRL.M.P.No.868 of 2019]

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the

petition and the Memorandum of Grounds in CRL A.No.787 of 2017 on the

file of the High Court and upon hearing the arguments of

M/S.K.SHANMUGAM,

Advocate

for

the

petitioner,

and

of

Mrs.V.SARATHADEVI Government Advocate on behalf of the Respondent,

the court made the following order:-

The petitioner is A1 in Spl.C.C.No.1 of 2016, on the file of the

Mahila Court/Special Court for Cases under POCSO Act/Children's

Court, Chennai. By judgment dated 05.10.2017, he was convicted for

offence under Sections 341 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and was

sent to Special Home for a period of three years, as per Section 18

(1)(g) of Juvenile Justice (Care an Protection) Act, 2015 for the

offence under Section 302 IPC. Hence, the petitioner filed the above

appeal. Pending appeal, he seeks for suspension of sentence.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in

a wordy quarrel among the friends, i..e. the petitioner and two

others, the petitioner alleged to have assaulted the deceased, due to

which, he sustained grievous injuries. The learned counsel would

further submit that the petitioner has not committed any such offence

and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would also

submit that no overt act is attributed as against the petitioner and

in a petty quarrel between the friends, the deceased sustained

injuries and subsequently died. He would further submit that at the

time of occurrence, the petitioner was 17 years old, he is studying

10^th standard and he is going to write his 10^th examination. It is

also the submission of the learned counsel that there are several

infirmities and inconsistencies in the prosecution case. It is

contended that there are contradictions in the material particulars

between the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Hence, the learned

counsel would pray for suspending the sentence.

3

Heard the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) on

the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner. She would

submit that there was a dispute among the petitioner and three of his

friends. In the said dispute, one person attacked the other person.

As far as the present petitioner is concerned, he is arrayed as A1

and he stabbed the deceased with knife, due to which the deceased

died after some time. Therefore, the learned Government Advocate

prays for dismissing the petition.

4

Earlier the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) was

directed to get a report from the Superintendent, Govt. Special Home,

Chengalpattu, where the petitioner/accused is now undergoing sentence

about his conduct and behaviour. In response to the direction, the

learned Government Advocate has filed a report dated 31.01.2019,

which is extracted hereunder:

,y;yj;jpy; rpwhhpd; elj;ij

“

rpwhh; 06.10.2017 md;W fhiyapy; ,y;yj;jpy; nrh;f;fg;gl;lhd;. rpwh