Vellaichamy vs State represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 Supreme(Mad) 1119

M.SATHYANARAYANAN
Vellaichamy – Appellant
Versus
State represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police – Respondent

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :R. Babu Rajendran for K. Baalasundaram, Advocates.
For the Respondent:P. Kandasamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side).

Judgment :-

1. The second accused in C.C.No.113 of 1998 on the file of the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Special Court for Prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputtur, is the appellant.

2. The appellant/A-2 along with A.1, namely, Perumalsamy, stood charged and tried for the following offences:

A.1	U/s.7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.(in short "P.C. Act).
A-2/appellant	U/s.7, 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act.

3. The trial Court, vide judgment dated 10.06.2004, has acquitted A.1 and convicted A-2/appellant herein for the commission of the above said offences and imposed the sentences, thus:

Accused	Conviction	Sentence
A-2	U/s. 7 of P.C.Act	To undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment.
A-2	U/s. 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of P.C. Act	To undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo three months rigorous imprisonment.

The trial Court ordered the sentences of impris

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2015 Supreme(Mad) 1119

M.SATHYANARAYANANVellaichamy – AppellantVersusState represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police – Respondent

M.SATHYANARAYANAN
Vellaichamy – Appellant
Versus
State represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police – Respondent