Partly allowed

S.K.Sundaram v. State Represented by

Madras HC20 Aug 2019CRL MP/11474/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On bail application by an appellant convicted and sentenced for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC, asking for suspension of sentence pending appeal. The court allowed suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment and enlarged the appellant on bail.

What did the court decide?

The substantive sentences of imprisonment are suspended pending the disposal of the appeal. The appellant is enlarged on bail on Rs. 50,000 bond with two sureties.

S.K.Sundaram Vs State Represented by — Corruption | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Tuesday, the Twentieth day of August Two Thousand Nineteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.11474 OF 2019

¶7

IN CRL.A.NO.517 OF 2019

¶8

S.K.SUNDARAM [ APPELLANT / ACCUSED ]

¶9

¶10

STATE REPRESENTED BY [ RESPONDENT ] INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SPE/CBI/ACB/CHENNAI,

¶11

RC.NO.MA1 2001 A 004,

¶12

OF SPE/CBI/ACB/CHENNAI.

¶13

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the Memorandum of Grounds in CRL.A.NO.517 OF 2019 on the file of the High Court, the High Court will be pleased to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner in C.C.No.02/2003 passed by the learned II Additional District Judge (CBI Cases), Coimbatore by a judgment dated 18.07.2019 and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the abvoe CRL.A.NO.517 OF 2019 [IN CRL.MP.NO.11474 OF 2019]

¶14

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the Memorandum of Grounds in CRL.A.NO.517 OF 2019 on the file of the High Court and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.K.BALASUBRAMANIAM, Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.K.SRINIVASAN SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR CBI CASES on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶15

The petition has been filed by the Appellant/A-3, to suspend the sentence of imprisonment imposed in the judgment dated 18.07.2019 made in Calendar Case No.02/2003 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge, (CBI Cases), Coimbatore, pending disposal of the appeal.

¶16

2 The Appellant/A-3 was found guilty of the offences u/s. 120 B r/w 420, 201, 468, 467 and u/s. 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and u/s.201, 468, 467 r/w 471 IPC and 420 IPC and he has been convicted and sentenced as under:

¶17

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

¶18

S. No .	Conviction		Sentence
1.	U/s.120B r/w 420, 201, 468, 471 IPC and u/s. 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.	3 years Rs.5,000/- S.I for 3 m	R.I and fine of in default to undergo onths.
2.	U/s.201, 468, 468 r/w 471 and 420 IPC	3 years Rs.5,000/- S.I for 3 substantive	R.I and fine of in default to undergo months for each of the offences.

¶19

The sentences are ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner has preferred this appeal. Pending appeal, the petitioner has filed the present miscellaneous petition seeking suspension of sentence.

¶20

3 The case of the prosecution is that the Appellant/A-3, who was working as an Assistant Director, Ex-Servicemen Welfare Board, Coimbatore, had entered into a criminal conspiracy with the other accused, during the year 2000-2001 at Ooty, Chennai and other places to cheat the Central Bank of India, Ooty branch and thereby by creating fabricated documents cheated the Central Bank of India to the tune of several Crores of Rupees.

¶21

4 The learned counsel for the Appellant/A-3 would submit that the petitioner is a retired army personnel and he has been wrongly implicated this case. He would further submit that there are arguable points available in the appeal and that the petitioner has got a fair chance of succeeding the appeal and would pray that the substantive sentence imposed against the petitioner may be suspended. He would further submit that the petitioner is aged about 74 years and that he has been suffering paralysis and his kidney is also affected and he was hospitalized at Bangalore and got discharged only yesterday [19.08.2019]. Meanwhile, a memo was filed before the trial Court, seeking extension of suspension of sentence, however, it had been rejected by the trial Court. He would also submit that the fine amount has been paid and the trial Court has also suspended the sentence of imprisonment till 16.08.2019.

¶22

5 The learned Special Public Prosecutor [CBI cases] has raised objections for suspending the sentence.

¶23

6 Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsels, the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended.

¶24

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

¶25

7 Hence, the substantive sentences of imprisonment imposed on the Appellant/A-3 by the trial Court alone are hereby suspended till the disposal of the appeal and the Appellant/A-3 is ordered to be enlarged on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- [Rupees Fifty thousand only] with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional District Judge (CBI Cases), Coimbatore and on further condition that the Appellant/A-3 shall report before the trial Court on the first working day of every English Calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶26

-sd/-
20/08/2019
This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried
into execution by all concerned
TRUE COPY
Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.)
High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO
1 THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE (CBI CASES),
COIMBATORE.
2 THE SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
FOR CBI CASES, HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
SPE/CBI/ACB/CHENNAI,
RC.NO.MA1 2001 A 004,
OF SPE/CBI/ACB/CHENNAI.
+1C.C. to M/S.K.BALASUBRAMANIAM Advocate on payment of
necessary charges SR NO.17349
Order
in
CRL MP.11474/2019
in
CRL.A.517/2019

¶27

Date :20/08/2019

¶28

From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ MK:22/08/2019

S.K.Sundaram v. State Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.K.Sundaram v. State Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Krishnakumar Vs The Deputy Superintendent of police

Mrs.v.K.Subramaniam & Brothers Vs M.S.Natarajan Proprietor

M/S.v.P.K.Textiles Vs M.S.Natarajan Prop.

Amani Praveen Kumar Vs State by Inspector of Police

J. Jeyaprathap Singh, Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

A.Aandi, 35 Years, Vs a.Chandra 30 Years