Ramasamy v. The State Of Tamilnadu
CRL.M.P.(MD) No. 1348 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE N. MALA CRL MP(MD) No. 1348 of 2026 IN CRL A(MD) No. 102 of 2026 Ramasamy Appellant / Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Trichy District (In Crime No. 13/2009) Respondent/Respondent For Petitioner(s):
Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For Respondent(s): Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor Prayer: This petition is filed under Section 430(1) of BNSS to Suspend the sentence imposed by the Special Court for Trial of Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, Tiruchirappalli, in Spl.C.No.24 of 2011 dated 26.12.2025 and enlarge the Appellant /accused on bail pending disposal of the main appeal.
ORDER
This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed to suspend the sentence imposed by the Special Court for Trial of Cases under Prevention of 1/7
Corruption Act, Tiruchirappalli, in Spl.C.No.24 of 2011 dated 26.12.2025 and enlarge him on bail pending disposal of the appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused was working as the Head Constable, BHEL Police Station, Trichirappalli, at the relevant point of time and the defacto complainant was running a finance company in the name New Akilandeswari Finance. The accused went to the said finance company and stated that arrest warrant was issued against the defacto complainant and demanded Rs.10,000/- as bribe for not executing the warrant. On the basis of the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case was registered in Crime No.13 of 2009 for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. After completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed and taken on file in Spl.C.No.24 of 2011 on the file of the Special Court for Trial of Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, Tiruchirappalli.
3. During trial, the prosecution examined 10 witnesses as P.W.1 to P.W.10, exhibited 19 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.19 and marked 6 material objects as M.O.1 to M.O.6. On the side of the defence, no witness was examined and no document was marked.
2/7
4. The learned the Special Court for Trial of Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, Tiruchirappalli, upon considering the evidence, both oral and documentary and on hearing the arguments on both sides, passed the impugned judgment in Spl.C.No.24 of 2011, dated 26.12.2025 convicting the petitioner/accused and sentencing him as follows: Offences Sentence Sec. 7 of P.C. Act 3 years R.I and a fine of Rs.2,000/- i/d S.I for 3 months Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d)of P.C Act 3 years R.I and a fine of Rs.2,000/- i/d S.I for three months Further, it was ordered that the sentences of imprisonment would run concurrently.
5. Challenging the above said conviction and sentence, the petitioner has preferred the present Criminal Appeal along with the above Miscellaneous Petition seeking suspension of sentence.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that there are several incongruities in the prosecution case and further there are contradictions in material particulars in the evidences of the prosecution witnesses. He would further submit that the petitioner has already paid the fine amount. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the Special 3/7
Court for Trial of Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, Tiruchirappalli, in Crl.M.P.No.581 of 2021 in Spl.C.No.24 of 2011 has granted interim suspension to the petitioner till 27.01.2026.
7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State would submit that there are enough materials available on record against the petitioner and hence, he strongly opposed the grant of suspension of sentence.
8. This Court has carefully considered the rival contentions put forward by either side and also perused the materials available on record.
9. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out the incongruities, inconsistencies and contradictions in material particulars in the prosecution's case, which establish that there are certain arguable points in the criminal appeal. However, the criminal appeal is not likely to be taken up for final hearing in the near future.
10. Considering the above stated facts and considering the fact that the trial court has suspended the sentence till 27.01.2026, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner herein is entitled for the relief of suspension of sentence.
4/7
11. Accordingly, the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the substantive sentence of imprisonment alone is suspended pending disposal of the appeal with the following directions:
(i) the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Special Court for Trial of Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, Tiruchirappalli. (ii) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Trial Judge may obtain a copy of any valid identity proof to ensure their identity ;
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court weekly once i.e every Monday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. If he is not able to appear before the trial Court on any day, he shall make arrangements to file an application under Section 317 of Cr.P.C (355 of BNSS) and shall appear before the trial Court on any other day in lieu of the date of his absence, as directed by the trial Court.
23-01-2026 CM 5/7
To, 1.The Inspector Of Police, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Trichy District (In Crime No. 13/2009)
2. The Special Court for Trial of Cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, Tiruchirappalli 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
N.MALA., J.
CM CRL MP(MD) No. 1348 of 2026 in CRL A(MD) No. 102 of 2026 23.01.2026 7/7