S.Ganesan Vs State Rep by, Inspector of Police — Corruption | Madras HC (2025)

S.Ganesan Vs State Rep by, Inspector of Police — Corruption | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the common order dated 03.12.2024 in Cr.M.P.No.284 of 2024 in C.C.No.137 of 2011 of the Special Court for Prevention of Corruption Act cases should be called for and set aside, as prayed for by the petitioner. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

As the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the accused/petitioner vide judgement and order dated 20.01.2025, no useful purpose will be served in proceeding the case any more; accordingly the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed, with no order as to costs.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MADRAS HIGH COURT (Shamim Ahmed, J.) — Crl.O.P.No.1013 of 2025 (with Crl.M.P.No.514 of 2025), decided 21-01-2025: S. Ganesan, Conservancy Inspector, Chennai Corporation (under suspension), facing trial in C.C.No.137 of 2011 before the Special Court for Prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Chennai, on charges under Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, petitioned to call for the records and set aside the common order dated 03.12.2024 in Cr.M.P.No.284 of 2024 in C.C.No.137 of 2011 (the facts section records dismissal of Crl.M.Ps.No.396 and 398 of 2023 by order dated 13.12.2024), complaining that the letter of P.W.7 dated 12.01.2010 was not brought on record. Before adjudication, the trial Court concluded the trial and by judgment dated 20.01.2025 convicted the petitioner under Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) PC Act, 1988 — four years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.50,000 fine (default three months simple imprisonment) under Section 7; five years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.50,000 fine (default six months simple imprisonment) under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d); sentences to run concurrently; Section 428 Cr.P.C. set-off; total fine Rs.1,00,000. Holding that no useful purpose would be served in proceeding further — a view submitted by the petitioner's own counsel and concurred in by the State — the Court dismissed the Criminal Original Petition with no order as to costs.

Crl.O.P.No.1013 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21-01-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED

CRL OP NO. 1013 of 2025

AND

CRL MP NO. 514 OF 2025

S.Ganesan S/o.Subramani, Conservancy Inspector, Placed Under Suspension, Division - 28, Unit - 5, Zoneii, Chennai Corporation Residing At No.96, 1st Street, Thiruvalluvar Nagar, Kodungaiyur, Chennai - 118.

Petitioner(s)

Vs

State Rep By, Inspector Of Police Dvac, Chennai.

Respondent(s)

CRL OP NO. 1013 of 2025

For Petitioner(s):

S.Xavier Felix F.Camilus Selva F.Jescintha Sheela M.Mubeen Shiek M.Muzzammil

For Respondent(s):

Public Prosecutor (v & Ac)

ORDER

Page 1 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.1013 of 2025

This criminal original petition is filed to call for the entire records pertaining dismissal of the common order in Cr.M.P.No.284 of 2024 in C.C.No.137 of 2011, dated 03.12.2024 on the file of the Special Court for Prevention of Corruption Act, cases and set aside the same.

Facts of the case in nutshell as per the petition:-

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is facing trial in C.C.No.137 of 2011 on the file of the Special Court for Prevention of Corruption Act, Cases, Chennai for the charges under Section 7, 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) and Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and presently the trial is in defence side evidence. It is alleged that the petitioner had demanded bribe from the de facto complainant and this had prompted the de facto complainant to lodge a complaint before the respondent. The petitioner was trapped and is currently facing criminal proceedings. The complainant due to previous enmity had lodged false complaint against the petitioner and the same was already intimated in writing to the Assistant Commissioner of Vigilance and Anti Corruption along with supporting

Page 2 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.1013 of 2025

documents. The investigating Officer also filed his final report. On perusal

of the final report it was found that the letter of P.W7 dated 12.01.2010 was not brought on record inspite of intimating the same to the Assistant Commissioner of Vigilance and Anti Corruption. Though, many petitions were filed raising these grounds, the Special Court vide order dated 13.12.2024 dismissed the Crl.M.Ps.No.396 and 398 of 2023. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed this criminal original petition.

Mr.Shiek M.Muzzammil, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court has already concluded the trial and convicted the petitioner vide order dated 20.01.2025. The appropriate observation of the judgement is reproduced here as under:

“42......

In result, accused is found guilty of commission of offence u/s7 and 13 (2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988. The accused is sentenced to undergo four years rigorous imprisonment and shall pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The accused is sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment and shall pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- in default to undergo 6 months simple imprisonment under

Page 3 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.1013 of 2025

Section 13 (2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the P.C.Act 1988, the sentence of imprisonment imposed for each offence shall run concurrently. The period of sentence already undergone by the accused if any is ordered to be set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. Total fine amount of Rs.1,00,000/-” .

The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that

there is no useful purpose to proceed the present case any further for the relief as sought for and also submitted that the present petition may be dismissed.

Mr.A.Gopinath, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), ascertained to this Court that the trial Court has already passed the above said order on 20.01.2025 and convicted and sentenced the petitioner. Thus no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceeding furthers in this case any more and hence, prayed for dismissal of this present petition.

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

After considering the arguments made by both the parties, it is

clear that the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the accused/petitioner Page 4 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.1013 of 2025

vide judgement and order dated 20.01.2025. Therefore, no useful purpose will be served in proceeding this case any more. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

21.01.2025

vca

Internet : Yes/No Citation : Yes/No

CRL OP NO. 1013 of 2025

To

State Rep By, Inspector Of Police Dvac, Chennai.

SHAMIM AHMED,J.

Vca

Page 5 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.1013 of 2025

CRL OP NO. 1013 of 2025 AND CRL MP NO. 514 OF 2025

21.01.2025

Page 6 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis