Allowed¶38

S.Kumar @ S.Vijayakumar v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC24 Mar 2026CRL MP/5351/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Suspension of sentence; Section 430(1) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita; Section 389(1) Cr.P.C.; Section 317 Cr.P.C.; CBI/ACB bank and financial institution scam; Prevention of Corruption Act 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d); IPC 120B, 409, 420, 468, 471; parity with co-accused; bond Rs.10,000 with two sureties; XXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge for CBI Cases Chennai; C.C.No.18 of 2013; Crl.A.No.322 of 2026; Crl.M.P.No.5351 of 2026; A.D. Jagadish Chandira; High Court of Judicature at Madras; sexagenarian accused; fine amount paid.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner/appellant till disposal of Crl.A.No.322 of 2026, subject to execution of a bond for Rs.10,000 with two sureties each for a like sum and the conditions of periodic appearance before the trial Court. ¶38

S.Kumar @ S.Vijayakumar Vs The Inspector of Police — Corruption | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶38

Issue for consideration

Whether the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner/appellant (A2) by the judgment dated 09.01.2026 in C.C.No.18 of 2013 should be suspended pending final disposal of Crl.A.No.322 of 2026.

¶11

Court's answer

Till the disposal of the appeal, the relief of suspension of sentence is granted to the petitioner/appellant, subject to conditions: execution of a bond for Rs.10,000 with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court; appearance before the trial Court once in six months on the first working day of every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m.; and, if unable to appear, representation by counsel filing an application under Section 317 Cr.P.C and appearance on such other dates as directed by the trial Court.

¶34

Ratio / Principle

The Court inclined to suspend the sentence taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions of learned counsel on either side, and the fact that the co-accused in the case had already been granted suspension of sentence.

¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras HC (A.D. Jagadish Chandira, J.), Crl.M.P.No.5351 of 2026 in Crl.A.No.322 of 2026 (24.03.2026): suspension of sentence allowed under Section 430(1) BNSS / Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. for petitioner S.Kumar @ S.Vijayakumar (A2), a sexagenarian convicted by judgment dated 09.01.2026 of the XXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge for CBI Cases relating to Banks and Financial Institution Scams, Chennai, in C.C.No.18 of 2013, under Sections 120B r/w 409, 420, 468, 471 IPC and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) Prevention of Corruption Act, 420 IPC and 471 r/w 468 IPC (one year RI plus fines of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.1,000/- respectively, concurrent; fines stated to have been paid). Suspension granted till disposal of the appeal, on the ground of parity with the co-accused whose sentence was already suspended, subject to a Rs.10,000/- bond with two sureties, six-monthly appearance before the trial Court, and Section 317 Cr.P.C. representation if unable to appear.

¶1

Crl.M.P.No.5351 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 24.03.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

Crl.M.P.No.5351 of 2026

¶7

in Crl.A.No.322 of 2026

¶8

S.Kumar @ S.Vijayakumar ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The Inspector of Police, CBI/ACB, Shastri Bhavan, Chennai. ... Respondent

¶11

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 of imprisonment imposed on the appellant/accused by the order and judgment dated 09.01.2026 of the learned XXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge for CBI Cases relating to Banks and Financial Institution Scams, Chennai, in C.C.No.18 of 2013 pending the final disposal of the criminal appeal.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Gopinath For Respondent : Mr.N.Baaskaran Special Public Prosecutor (CBI)

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking suspension of sentence of imprisonment, imposed by the learned XXIV

¶15

1/6

¶16

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

¶17

Crl.M.P.No.5351 of 2026

¶18

Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge for CBI Cases relating to Banks and Financial Institution Scams, Chennai , in C.C.No.18 of 2013, vide judgment dated 09.01.2026.

¶19

The conviction and sentence imposed against the petitioner/appellant (A2), vide impugned judgment are as follows:-

¶20

*Under Section*	*Sentence*
120B r/w 409, 420, 468, 471 of IPC and under Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act	one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo three months simple imprisonment.
420 of IPC	one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo three months simple imprisonment.
471 r/w 468 of IPC	one year of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to undergo three months simple imprisonment.
The sentence	s shall run concurrently.

¶21

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/appellant

¶22

submitted that the petitioner, a sexagenarian, is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case . He further submitted that t here 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 has a fair chance

¶23

2/6

¶24

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

¶25

Crl.M.P.No.5351 of 2026

¶26

of succeeding in the appeal. He also submitted that the fine amount has been paid by the petitioner/appellant. He further submitted that this Court has already suspended the sentence imposed in respect of the co-accused in this case. Hence, the sentence imposed on the petitioner/appellant may be suspended and he may be enlarged on bail.

¶27

Learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent opposed the suspension of sentence stating that the petitioner, in collusion with other accused, by forging and falsifying the documents, cheated the bank and caused significant financial loss. He further submitted that the trial Court, after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence produced by the prosecution, rightly found the petitioner/appellant guilty and convicted and sentenced him, as stated above.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant and learned Special Public Prosecutor (CBI) appearing for the respondent and perused the materials on record.

¶29

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and

¶30

also the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also taking note of the fact that the co-accused in this case has already been

¶31

3/6

¶32

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

¶33

Crl.M.P.No.5351 of 2026

¶34

granted suspension of sentence, this Court is inclined to suspend the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner. Accordingly, till the disposal of the appeal, the relief of suspension of sentence is granted to the petitioner/appellant, subject to the following conditions:-

¶35

“(i) The petitioner/appellant shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the XXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge for CBI Cases relating to Banks and Financial Institution Scams, Chennai ;

¶36

(ii) The petitioner/appellant shall appear before the trial Court once in six months on the first working day of every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶37

(iii) In the event of the petitioner not being able to appear before the trial Court concerned on the specified date, he shall be duly represented by his counsel, who shall file an application under Section 317 Cr.P.C before the trial Court concerned and the petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on such other date(s) as directed by the trial Court. ”

¶38