CRL MP/5047/2026 of Vijayakrishnan Vs The State rep.by
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.04.2026
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
in Crl.A.No.301 of 2026
Vijayakrishnan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State represented by,
The Assistant Superintendent of Police.
Villupuram Sub-Division,
Villupuram District.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Thiruvennainallur Police Station,
Villupuram District.
(Crime No.827 of 2024)
3. Abirami ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 430(1) of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita/Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. , to
suspend the sentence imposed in Spl.S.C.No.6 of 2025 dated 27.02.2026 on
the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases registered under
the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrociti es)
Act, 1989, Villupuram, and enlarge the petitioner on bail pen ding disposal
of the criminal appeal.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Rajkumar
For R1 & R2 : Ms.J.R.Archana
Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
O R D E R
This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking
suspension of sentence of imprisonment, imposed by the learned Special
Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases registered under the Schedul ed Castes
and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 19 89, Villupuram,
in Spl.S.C.No.6 of 2025, vide judgment dated 27.02.2026.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-
2.1. The petitioner/appellant is alleged to have committed
offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 64 and 351(3) of the BNS,
Section 4 of the TN Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002
(TNPHW Act) and Sections 3(1)(w)(i) and 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of At rocities) Act,
1989, [SC/ST (PoA) Act] on the victim/de facto complainant. Hence, a case
in Crime No.827 of 2024 came to be registered on 05.10.2024.
2.2. During the course of investigation, the case was altered
to one under Sections 351(3) & 55 of the BNS, Section 4 of the TNPHW
Act, 2002, Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act
and Sections 417, 376 & 108 of IPC.
2/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
2.3. After completion of investigation, the investigating
officer filed a charge sheet before the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court
for Exclusive Trial of Cases registered under the Scheduled Caste s and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Villupur am and the same
was taken on file as Spl.S.C.No.6 of 2025.
2.4. On issuance of summons, the accused appeared before
the Court and in compliance of Section 207 of Cr.P.C., copie s of relied
upon documents were furnished to him.
2.5. After hearing the counsel on both sides, charges were
framed against the accused. During initial questioning in r espect of the
incriminating materials, the accused denied the charges and sought trial.
2.6. On the side of the prosecution, PW1 to PW20 were
examined and Ex.P1 to Ex.P20 and M.O.1 (Cruzer Blade 8GB pen dr ive)
were marked. On the side of the defence, though no witnesses were
examined, Ex.D1 to Ex.D8 were marked.
2.7. The trial Court, after hearing the arguments on both
sides and upon consideration of the entire materials on record, found the
petitioner/appellant guilty of the offences charged and convicted and
sentenced him vide judgment dated 27.02.2026 as follows:-
3/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
Under Section Sentence
417 IPC One year simple imprisonment
376 IPC Ten years rigorous imprisonment and
fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to
undergo two years rigorous
imprisonment.
351(3) BNS Three year rigorous imprisonment
3(1)(w)(i) of the SC/ST
(PoA) Act
Five years rigorous imprisonment and
fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo
one year rigorous imprisonment.
The aforesaid sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
3. The submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner/appellant are as follows:-
3.1. The petitioner/appellant is innocent and there was a
consensual relationship between the petitioner/appellant and the victim/de
facto complainant (PW1). Further, it is not the case where the
petitioner/appellant had cheated the victim/ de facto complainant (PW1) to
get his lust satiated and therefore, the offences under Sections 376 & 417 of
IPC cannot be made out on the facts of the present case. Hence , a case of
consensual relationship between the parties, which has later turned sour, has
been falsely projected as a case of rape and cheating.
3.2. In the evidence of the victim/ de facto complainant
(PW1), she admitted that she was the one who refused to continue the
relationship with the petitioner/appellant. She further admitt ed to having
4/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
relationship with one Yogeshwaran. When the petitioner/appella nt
questioned about her affair with the said Yoeshwaran, the vi ctim/de facto
complainant (PW1) threatened him stating that she would file a complaint
against him.
3.3. Furthermore, the victim/ de facto complainant (PW1)
admitted that the petitioner/appellant had requested her mother’s permission
for marriage and informed her that the victim (PW1) was havin g an affair
with another person.
3.4. In such circumstances, the case of the prosecution is
false and the trial Court has erred in convicting the petitioner/appellant.
3.5. There are arguable points available in the Criminal
Appeal, which is unlikely to be taken up for final hearing in the near future
and the petitioner/appellant have a fair chance of succeeding in the appeal.
3.6. The petitioner was granted bail during trial and he ha s
not misused the liberty granted to him. The petitioner/app ellant has been
suffering incarceration in the Central Prison, Cuddalore, from the date of
arrest i.e., on 27.02.2026. Hence, the sentence imposed on the
petitioner/appellant may be suspended and he may be enlarged on bail.
4. In support of his contention that the offences under Section
376 & 417 of IPC cannot be made out in a case of prolonged consen sual
5/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
relationship subsequently turning sour , the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner/appellant relied on the oft-quoted judgment of the Hon’ble
Apex Court in Mahes Damu Khare vs. The State of Maharastra &
Another reported in (2024) 11 SCC 398.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
appearing for respondents 1 and 2 produced the counter filed by the first
respondent before this Court today and submitted as follows:
5.1. The petitioner/appellant, who belongs to a backward
community, became acquainted with the victim/ de facto complainant
(PW1), who belongs to a scheduled caste community, in a br ick kiln. Under
the false promise of marriage, the petitioner/appellant alle gedly had sexual
intercourse with the victim/ de facto complainant (PW1) and subsequently
refused to marry her.
5.2. When the victim/ de facto complainant (PW1)
questioned the petitioner/appellant regarding his change in behaviour, he
harassed her by using her caste name. Consequently, due to the humi liation
caused by the petitioner/appellant, the victim/ de facto complainant (PW1)
also attempted to commit suicide.
6/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
5.3. The trial Court, after taking into consideration the
oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution, rightly fou nd
the petitioner/appellant guilty and convicted and sentenced him , as stated
above. Hence, the petition seeking suspension of sentence may be
dismissed.
6. Though notice has been served on the third respondent and
her name is printed in the cause list, there is no representation on her behalf.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant and
the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing fo r
respondents 1 and 2 and perused the materials on record.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and
also the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and taking
note of the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner /appellant,
this Court is of the view that the sentence of imprisonment can be
suspended and the petitioner/appellant can be granted bail on certain
conditions. Accordingly, pending disposal of the appeal, the substanti ve
sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended and the petitioner /appellant is
enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions:-
7/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
“(i) The petitioner/appellant shall execute a bond
for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only),
with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction
of the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court for
Exclusive Trial of Cases registered under the Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989, Villupuram;
(ii) The petitioner/appellant shall appear before
the trial Court on the first working day of every English
calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;
(iii) It is made clear that the petitioner/appellant
shall not communicate with either the victim or her
family members.”
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands
ordered.
20.04.2026
ham
8/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
To
1. The Sessions Judge,
Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases registered
under the SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989,
Villupuram.
2. The Assistant Superintendent of Police.
Villupuram Sub-Division,
Villupuram District.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Thiruvennainallur Police Station,
Villupuram District.
4. The Superintendent,
Central Prison,
Cuddalore.
5. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
9/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
ham
Crl.M.P.No.5047 of 2026
in Crl.A.No.301 of 2026
20.04.2026
10/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis