SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(Mad) 999

N.ARUMUGHAM
D. Venkatasan – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Appearing Advocates:C.J. Madanagopal, Raja Elango, P. Kumaresan, Advocates.

Judgment :-

The above appeal is directed against the Judgment of conviction and sentence rendered by the IX Additional Special Judge, Madras in C.C. No. 7 of 1990 on 26-3-1991, whereunder, the appellant was found guilty for the offence under Section 7(3 Courts) and 13(1)(d)(1) and (2) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months each with a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of which to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month under each count under Section 7, and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year with a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of which to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month under S. 13(1)(d)(1) and (2) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the sentences were ordered to run concurrently

2. The appellant was working as Sub Inspector of Police, Traffic Investigation Wing, attached to Anna Square Police Station on the relevant day of occurrence in the case

One Mr. Ayub of Madras working as Accounts Assistant in Climax Agency, Nungambakkam, along with one Vijayaragavan a co-employee happened to travel in an a




























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top