In a recent judgment, the court upheld the conviction of the accused in a corruption case but reduced the sentence considering the appellant’s age and circumstances. The legal analysis focused on the appellant being a senior citizen, aged about 70 years, and having already served a significant portion of the original two-year sentence. This case sheds light on the court’s approach to balancing justice and compassion in sentencing individuals convicted of white-collar crimes.
Facts
- The appellant, original accused, is aggrieved by the judgment and order of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court
- The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant and confirmed the conviction and sentence pronounced by the Special Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate
- The appellant was convicted under Sections 7, 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- The Special Judge sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and imposed a fine of Rs.5,000/-
- The Court confirmed the conviction of the appellant – original accused.
- The present appeal is now limited to consideration of the quantum of sentence.
Also Read: Legal Analysis on Compensation and Protection for a Rape Victim
Arguments
- The appellant is a senior citizen aged about 69/70 years.
- The appellant has already undergone approximately one year and one month of rigorous imprisonment.
- The appellant has been dismissed from service due to being convicted for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
- The respondent-State has opposed the prayer to reduce the sentence imposed on the appellant.
- The appellant was convicted for offenses under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
- The respondent-State argued against showing leniency towards the accused due to the nature of the offenses.
- The appellant has already undergone approximately one year and one month of the two-year sentence.
- Considering the appellant’s age of 70 years, being a senior citizen, and his dismissal from service, the sentence is being reduced to one year and one month rigorous imprisonment.
Also Read: Analysis of Seniority Determination in Armed Forces Personnel Case
Decision
- Judgment and order of conviction confirmed by the High Court is upheld.
- Order of fine remains unchanged.
- The appeal is partly allowed.
- Appellant to be released after serving one year and one-month rigorous imprisonment, unless needed in another case.
- Sentence reduced from two years to one year and one-month rigorous imprisonment.
Also Read: Judicial Analysis of Section 319 Cr.P.C. Power
Case Title: S. SUNDARA KUMAR Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE (2021 INSC 22)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000039-000039 / 2021
