Sridharan v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Eighth day of October Two Thousand and Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN CRL.M.P.(MD)No.8680 of 2021 in CRL.A.(MD)No.436 of 2021 SRIDHARAN ... PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ ACCUSED NO.11 Vs STATE REP BY THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBI/EOW,CHENNAI.

IN RC 11(E)/2010/CBI/EOW/CHENNAI. ... RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT Petition filed praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court may be pleased to suspend the sentence passed in CC No.8/2011 on the file of II Additional Sessions Judge,(CBI Cases) Madurai imposed on the peitioner and enlarge the petitioner on bail pending disposal of the appeal preferred by him before this Honble Court. Prayer in CRL.A.(MD)No.436 of 2021:

To take this appeal on file, call for the records from the lower court, hear the counsel for the appellant/accused and allow the same by setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant/accused passed in C.C.No.8 of 2011 by the II Additional Sessions Judge(CBIcases) Madurai, dated 27.09.2021. Order : This petition coming up for orders on this day, upon perusing the petition filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of MR.AZAGARSAMI.AK., Advocate for the petitioner and of MRS.L.VICTORIA GOWRI, Assistant Solicitor General on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:- This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been preferred seeking to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner by judgment dated 27.09.2021 passed in C.C.No.8 of 2011, on the file of the II Additional District Judge (CBI Cases), Madurai and to enlarge the petitioner, on bail pending disposal of the appeal.

2.The petitioner is arrayed as an accused No.11 in the above referred case. After full-fledged trial, the learned trial Judge came to the conclusion that the petitioner was found guilty, convicted and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 months for the offences under Sections 120-B r/w 420 and 471 r/w 468 IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; and to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 months under section 420 IPC; and to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-, in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 6 months for the offence under section 13(2) r/w 13 (1)(d) of P.C. Act.

3.Challenging the above said conviction and sentence, the petitioner has filed Crl.A(MD) No.436 of 2021 along with the instant miscellaneous petition seeking suspension of sentence and bail. 4.Heard Mr.A.K.Azhagarsamy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.L.Victoria Gowri, learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the respondent/State.

5.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there are several infirmities in the prosecution case and further there are contradictions in material particulars between the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that suspension of sentence has already been granted by the trial court, in Cr.M.P No.1614 of 2021, dated 27.09.2021 for the period of 30 days from the date of the judgment.

6.It is submitted by the learned Assistant Solicitor General that there are enough materials available on record against the petitioner, as per the evidence adduced by the prosecution, there is no infirmity in the prosecution case. Accordingly, she strongly opposed to grant suspension of sentence.

7.This Court has carefully considered the rival contentions put forward by either side and also perused the materials available on record.

8.The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that certain infirmities and inconsistencies in this case and also certain contradictions in material particulars. The fact remains that there are arguable points involved in this criminal appeal and further the criminal appeal is not likely to be taken up for final hearing in the near future and as such, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner herein is entitled to the relief of grant of suspension of sentence.

9.Accordingly, the relief of suspension of sentence and bail is granted to the petitioner on the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties, of whom, one should be a blood relative, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the II Additional District Judge (CBI Cases), Madurai. (ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the trial Court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity; and (iii) The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on the first working day of every month at 10.30 a.m until further orders and 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 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.

sd/- 28/10/2021 / TRUE COPY / / /2021 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

TO 1.THE II ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE(CBICASES) MADURAI.

2.THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBI/EOW,CHENNAI.

3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL.M.P.(MD)No.8680 of 2021 in CRL.A.(MD)No.436 of 2021 Date :28/10/2021 VB/JM/SAR-III/28.10.2021/3P/4C