Saba @ Sabarathinam's plea for suspension of sentence dismissed due to extensive criminal history and pending murder cases
In a significant decision by the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, the petition for suspension of sentence filed by Saba @ Sabarathinam, a notorious gang leader from Tamil Nadu, has been dismissed. The petitioner was seeking suspension of his 14-year rigorous imprisonment sentence for offenses under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, specifically for leading a gang involved in the purchase, storage, and distribution of Ganja.
The judgment, delivered by Justice B. Pugalendhi, emphasized the discretionary nature of granting bail post-conviction, which must be exercised judiciously. The court noted Sabarathinam's extensive criminal history, with 23 pending cases, including seven murder cases, as a significant factor in its decision to deny the suspension of his sentence.
The case stems from an incident on October 25, 2020, when two co-accused were caught with 42 kilograms of Ganja in Madurai. The investigation revealed that Sabarathinam was the leader directing the operations. Despite being in jail for nearly four years and the appeal against his conviction being pending, the court found no compelling reasons to grant bail, citing the petitioner's potential to abscond and the ongoing delay in other pending trials due to his non-cooperation.
The judgment underscored the balance courts must maintain between protecting the personal liberty of the accused and being answerable to victims, especially in cases involving heinous crimes. The court referenced several Supreme Court decisions to highlight that post-conviction bail requires strong and compelling reasons due to the presumption of guilt following a conviction.
The court also noted that Sabarathinam's previous application for suspension of sentence had been dismissed, and despite claims of changed circumstances, no substantial justification was provided. The decision reflects the judiciary's stance on ensuring that individuals with serious criminal records do not misuse bail provisions to evade justice.
Bottom line:-
Suspension of sentence under Section 389(1) CrPC is a discretionary power of the court and not a vested right of the accused; criminal antecedents, nature of the offence, and the conduct of the accused are relevant factors to consider for the grant of bail post-conviction.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 389(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Saba @ Sabarathinam v. State of Tamil Nadu, (Madras)(Madurai Bench) : Law Finder Doc id # 2931878
