High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 08 KL CK 0149

K.P.Muhammed Jaseel vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 24 August 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
R. Narayana Pisharadi, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No..1 of 2021 in Crjminal Appeal.No.540 Of 2021

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

21 paragraphs · 435 words

R. Narayana Pisharadi, J

1.

This is an application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C.

2.

The petitioner/appellant stands convicted by the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thalassery for the offences punishable

under Sections 409, 468, 471, 477A and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention

of Corruption Act, 1988. He has been sentenced to undergo various terms of imprisonment by the trial court for each offence and also to pay fine.

The total amount of fine imposed on the petitioner for various offences comes to more than Rs.8,00,000/-.

3.

The trial court has imposed a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,00,000/- and in default of

payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 409 of the IPC.

4.

Since the offence under Section 409 IPC is punishable with imprisonment for life or for a term of ten years, opportunity was granted to the learned

Public Prosecutor to file objection, if any, to the application. However, the prosecution has not filed any objection.

5.

The offence punishable under Section 409 IPC is triable by a Judicial First Class Magistrate. If that offence had been tried by such a court, the

maximum term of imprisonment which could have been imposed on the petitioner would have been only three years. A sentence of rigorous

imprisonment for a period of ten years was imposed on the petitioner merely for the reason that the trial court happened to be a Special Court under

the PC Act, which is presided over by a Sessions Judge.

6.

Moreover, considering the pendency of the criminal appeals in this Court, it is unlikely that hearing of the appeal filed by the petitioner would take

place in the near future. It may take several years before the appeal would come up for final hearing in the due course.

7.

In the aforesaid circumstances, I am inclined to suspend the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the trial court on conditions.

8.

Consequently, the petition is allowed as follows: The sentence imposed on the petitioner/appellant by the trial court shall stand suspended and he

shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the

satisfaction of the trial court and on simultaneously depositing an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs only) in the trial court towards the fine

amount.