K.Subramani v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23.03.2026

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA in Crl.A.No.316 of 2026 A.Subramani, Formerly Assistant Divisional Officer, No.186, 2nd Main Road, TNHB, Walajapet, Ranipet District.

...Petitioner

Vs.

State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Vigilance & Anti-Corruption, Kancheepuram.

...Respondent

Criminal miscellaneous petition filed under Section 430(1) of BNSS, seeking to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner in Spl.C.C.No.17 of 2025 dated 25.02.2026 by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram and enlarge the petitioner on bail, pending disposal of the above Appeal.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Ravi Anantha Padmanaban, Senior Advocate Assisted by Mr.S.Dayanand For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar, GA(Crl. Side) 1/6

ORDER

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking suspension of sentence imposed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram, in Spl.C.C.No.17 of 2025, vide judgment dated 25.02.2026.

2. The conviction and sentence imposed against the petitioner/ appellant, vide impugned judgment are as follows:- Under Section Sentence 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 To undergo three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

13(2) r/w. 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, To undergo three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant submitted that the petitioner is innocent and though the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, who was an Assistant Divisional Officer, Tamil Nadu Fire and Rescue Services, Kanchipurm at the relevant point of time, demanded a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards illegal gratification from the de facto 2/6

complainant for issuance of fire certificate and subsequently reduced the bribe amount to Rs.3,000/-, the prosecution has not proved the demand and acceptance of the bribe beyond reasonable doubt. Further, the petitioner examined witnesses D.Ws.1 to 6 on his behalf to disprove the case of the prosecution. However, the trial Court had miserably failed to consider the same and had mechanically convicted the petitioner for the abovesaid offences, which is not sustainable. He also submitted that there are arguable points 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 of succeeding in the appeal and hence, the sentence imposed on the petitioner/appellant may be suspended.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the trial court, relying upon the materials on record and cogent evidence adduced by the prosecution, had rightly convicted the petitioner for the aforementioned offences, which cannot be termed erroneous or unsustainable. Hence, he strongly opposed for granting suspension of sentence.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials on record.

3/6

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant, this Court is inclined to grant the relief of suspension of sentence to the petitioner, till the disposal of the criminal appeal, on certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended and the petitioner/appellant is ordered to be released on bail on his executing 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 learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram and on further conditions that:- (i) The petitioner/appellant and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impressions in the surety bonds and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar Cards or Bank Passbooks to ensure their identities. (ii) The petitioner/appellant shall appear before the trial Court on the first working day of every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

4/6

8. This criminal miscellaneous petition stands ordered accordingly. 23.03.2026 (2/2) skt To:

1.

The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram.

2.

The Inspector of Police, Vigilance & Anti-Corruption, Kancheepuram.

3.

The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

skt in Crl.A.No.316 of 2026 (2/2) 23.03.2026 6/6