Supreme Court - Daily Orders
G. Mariappan vs State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police on 27 January, 2021
Bench: Uday Umesh Lalit, Hemant Gupta, S. Ravindra Bhat
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.80 OF 2021
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.4090 of 2020)
G. MARIAPPAN …Appellant
VERSUS
STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE …Respondent
ORDER
Leave granted.
This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 31.07.2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Crl. R.C. No.1469 of 2011.
The appellant was convicted by the IInd Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai in CC No.9324 of 1991 for the offences punishable under Sections 408 and 477-A read with Section 34 IPC and was sentenced to imprisonment for one year each in respect of the above offences. Criminal Signature Not Verified Appeal No.175 of 2010 challenging said decision, was dismissed by the Digitally signed by Dr. Mukesh Nasa Date: 2021.01.29 09:50:46 IST Reason: IIIrd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Chennai. 2 Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred the aforesaid Criminal Revision Case in the High Court. While maintaining the order of conviction, by the decision presently under appeal, the High Court reduced the substantive sentence under the aforesaid two counts to six months each.
The defalcated amount in the present case was in the sum of Rs.1,75,000/-, which amount along with interest has already been deposited by the appellant. Further, in pursuance of the order dated 18.11.2020 passed by this Court, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) has also been deposited in the Registry of this Court.
Considering the fact that the prosecution was launched in the year 1991 and the fact that the appellant is presently 70 years of age, in our view, the ends of justice would be met if, while maintaining the order of conviction recorded against the appellant, the substantive sentence in respect of aforesaid two offences is reduced to the period already undergone.
It is, therefore, directed:-
a) While maintaining the order of conviction, the substantive sentence is reduced to the period already undergone;
b) However, the sentence of fine is increased with additional imposition of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) by way of fine; and 3
c) The amount deposited in the Registry of this Court shall now be made over to the concerned Trial Court in satisfaction of the sentence of imposition of fine as aforesaid.
The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.
………….......................J. [UDAY UMESH LALIT] ………….......................J. [HEMANT GUPTA] ………….......................J. [S. RAVINDRA BHAT] NEW DELHI;
JANUARY 27, 2021.
4
ITEM NO.8 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-C (HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.4090/2020 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 31-07-2019 in CRLRC No.1469/2011 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Madras) G. MARIAPPAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and IR; and, IA No.78337/2020 – FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 27-01-2021 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT For Petitioner(s) Mr. B. Karunakaran, Adv.
Mr. Anbalagan, Adv.
Mr. S. Gowthaman, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR Mr. Rajarajeswaran S., Adv.
Mr. Aditya Chadha, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed, in terms of the Signed Order. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(MUKESH NASA) (PRADEEP KUMAR)
COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER
(Signed Order is placed on the File)