Disposed

Karthick Prakash v. State Rep. by Its

Madras HC26 Jun 2019CRL MP/8266/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition to suspend the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on an appellant convicted in CBI bank fraud cases. The High Court suspended the sentence subject to bail conditions, recognizing arguable grounds in the pending appeal.

What did the court decide?

Suspended the substantive sentence of imprisonment subject to execution of a bond with two sureties and monthly court appearance.

Karthick Prakash Vs State Rep. by Its — Corruption | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Wednesday, the Twenty Sixth day of June Two Thousand Nineteen

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

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

¶6

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.8266 of 2019

¶7

in CRL.A.No.381 of 2019

¶8

KARTHICK PRAKASH [ PETITIONER / APPELLANT ]

¶9

¶10

STATE REP. BY ITS [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CBI/EOW/CHENNAI. CHENNAI.

¶11

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the Memorandum of Grounds in CRL.A.No.381 of 2019 on the file of the High Court, the High Court will be pleased to suspend the sentence and grant bail against the judgement made in C.C.No.3 of 2010 on the file of the Learned XI Additional Sessions Judge (CBI Cases) at Chennai dated 31.05.2019 pending CRL.A.No.381 of 2019

¶12

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the Memorandum of Grounds in CRL.A.No.381 of 2019 on the file of the High Court and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.J.RAVISHANKAR, 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:-

¶13

This petition has been filed to suspend the sentence of imprisonment imposed in the judgment dated 31.05.2019 made in C.C.No.3 of 2010 on the file of the XI Additional Special Sessions Court (CBI Cases relating to Banks and Financial Institutions), Chennai pending disposal of the appeal.

¶14

2 . The petitioner/appellant herein is the 1st accused in C.C.No.2 of 2010 on the file of the XI Additional Special Sessions Court (CBI Cases relating to Banks and Financial Institutions), Chennai. He was found guilty of the offences u/s.120-B r/w 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 109 of IPC and Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and he has been convicted and sentenced as under:

¶15

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

¶16

S.No.	Conviction	Sentence
1.	u/s.120-B r/w 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 109 of IPC and Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(c) and (d) of the PC Act.	3 years R.I and fine of Rs.75,000/- in default to undergo S.I for 6 months.
2.	u/s.420 of IPC	3 years R.I and fine of Rs.75,000/- in default to undergo S.I for 6 months.
3.	u/s.109 r/w 467, 468 of IPC	3 years R.I and fine of Rs.75,000/- in default to undergo S.I for 6 months.
4.	u/s.109 r/w 468 of IPC	3 years R.I and fine of Rs.75,000/- in default to undergo S.I for 6 months.
5.	u/s.471 of IPC	3 years R.I and fine of Rs.75,000/- in default to undergo S.I for 6 months.
Aggriev appeal.	ed against the same, the	petitioner has preferred the present

¶17

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/appellant [A-1] along with other accused entered into criminal conspiracy between 2005 and 2007 with a fraudulent intention to cheat the State Bank of Saurashtra, Anna Nagar Branch, Chennai for forging the sale agreement, construction agreement, the legal opinion, Salary slip of the borrowers and guarantors and by using the same as genuine along with the other documents, fraudulently in criminal breach of trust and by abusing his official position by public servant released the housing loans for construction of housing flats and misused the funds for other purposed and intentionally did not arranged repay the loan amount and thereby, causing wrongly full loss to the above said Bank. After completion of investigation, the trial was conducted and the petitioner/appellant [A-1] was convicted for the offence u/s.120B r/w 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 109 of IPC and Sections 13(2) r/w 13 (1)(c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo imprisonment as stated above.

¶18

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant [A-1] would submit that there are arguable points available in the appeal and that the petitioner/appellant [A-1] has got a fair chance of succeeding the appeal and would pray that the substantive sentence

¶19

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

¶20

imposed against the petitioner/appellant [A-1] may be suspended. He would also submit that the fine amount has been paid by the petitioner/appellant [A-1] and the trial Court has also suspended the sentence of imprisonment till 30.06.2019.

¶21

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

¶22

6 . Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsels and also considering that there are arguable points available in the appeal, I am inclined to suspend the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone subject to the following conditions that:-

¶23

(i) the petitioner/appellant [A-1] shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the XI Additional Special Sessions Court (CBI Cases relating to Banks and Financial Institutions), Chennai.

¶24

(ii) the petitioner/appellant [A-1] shall appear before the above said Court on the first working day of every English Calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶25

-sd/26/06/2019

¶26

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶27

TRUE COPY

¶28

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶29

¶30

1 THE XI ADDITIONAL SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE, (CBI CASES RELATING TO BANKS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS), CHENNAI

¶31

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

¶32

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CBI/EOW/CHENNAI. CHENNAI.

¶33

3 THE SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR CBI CASES, HIGH COURT, MADRAS

¶34

+1 C.C. to M/S.J.RAVISHANKAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.12649

¶35

Order
in
CRL MP.8266/2019
in
CRL.A.381/2019
Date :26/06/2019
From 7.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified
copies of the BAIL/Anti.BAIL Orders in this format
cm 28/06/2019

¶36

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

Karthick Prakash v. State Rep. by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karthick Prakash v. State Rep. by Its

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Sundarambal Vs 1.JAGANATHAN

R. Sundarambal W/O. Vs T.C. Ramaswamy S/O.

R. Sundarambal W/O. Vs Aruchamy Gounder S/O

Hariprasanna Vs the State Rep by

P.Sekar Vs State Rep. by

M.Abdullah Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police