G. Chokkalingam S/O G. Gopal ... vs Central Bureau Of Investigation ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 32 Bom

                                                                           7-IA-327-2020.doc


                    Shailaja


                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                          CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                         INTERIM APPLICATION NO.327 OF 2020
                                                         IN
                                           CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.96 OF 2020


                    G. Chokkalingam                             ]    Applicant

                                Vs.

                    Central Bureau of Investigation ]
                    Economic Offence Wing, Mumbai ]
                    and another.                    ]                Respondents

                                                   .....
                    Ms. Sandeep B. Naik, for Applicant.

                    Ms. Amita Kuttikrishnan, Special P.P. for Respondent No.1-C.B.I.

                    Mr. Arfan Sait, A.P.P, for Respondent No.2-State.
                                                     .....
                                              CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.

                                                       DATE   : 3rd JANUARY, 2022.
                    P.C.


                    1.          This is an application under section 389 of the Code of
                    Criminal Procedure for suspension of substantive sentence,
                    pending the appeal, by the applicant namely Mr. Chokkalingam,
                    resident of Kerala.


                    2.          Heard Mr. Naik, learned Counsel for the applicant, Ms.
                    Kuttikrishnan, learned Special P.P for respondent No.1-C.B.I and
                    Mr. Sait, learned A.P.P, for respondent No.2-State.


                     Digitally signed by SHAILAJA
SHAILAJA SHRIKANT    SHRIKANT HALKUDE
HALKUDE              Date: 2022.01.04 14:06:45 +0530                                           1 of 4
                                                 7-IA-327-2020.doc


3.      The Special Court for C.B.I at Greater Mumbai by the
impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 20 th December,
2019 convicted and sentenced all the accused except accused
No.9, who was a public servant.


4.      The applicant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for six months with fine of Rs.8,000/-.


5.      It is submitted that the applicant has deposited the fine
amount. Mr. Naik submits that the applicant has a good case on
merits and, therefore, seeks suspension of the substantive
sentence, pending the appeal.


6.      Ms. Kuttikrishnam, learned Special P.P has drawn my
attention to the observations made in the impugned judgment,
more particularly, in paragraph 26 qua the applicant which read
thus;


         "It is to be noted that the import of arguments
         advanced on behalf of accused No.4 indicates that
         he prepared the TDS certificates but at the behest of
         accused No.1 and 2.      It is to be noted that the
         prosecution has independently proved the factum
         that the TDS certificates, which were relied and
         attached to the Income Tax Return form of accused
         No.3 pertaining to the certificate issued by deductor
         M/s Link International was prepared by accused
         No.4 Chokkalingam. This factum is proved through


                                                                    2 of 4
                                                  7-IA-327-2020.doc


         the   evidence    of   handwriting    expert       Exh.9.
         Furthermore, two cheques Exh.156 and 157 worth
         Rs.30,000/- each were drawn on accused No.7 in
         favour of accused No.4 and same were credited in
         the account of accused No.4. This satisfactory
         evidence does not wipe up by the accused by
         leading probable circumstance.       So this factum
         proves that the accused No.4 has requisite
         knowledge of the main object to cheat Income Tax
         Office by claiming refund certificate and on the
         basis of forged TDS certificates is proved".


7.    Having taken into consideration the submissions made by
Mr. Naik, learned Counsel for the applicant and Ms. Kuttikrishnan,
learned Special P.P, it would be just and proper to suspend the
substantive sentence, pending the appeal by passing following
order;
                                :ORDER:

(a) The application is allowed;

(b) The substantive sentence awarded by the special Court(CBI) Greater Bombay stands suspended, pending the appeal and the applicant shall be released on executing a P.R bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Court, Greater Mumbai;

3 of 4 7-IA-327-2020.doc

(c) The applicant shall attend the Court as and when directed;

(d) The applicant shall attend the Court at the time of final hearing scrupulously;

(e) The applicant shall furnish his permanent address and cell number to the respondents within a week from today.

(f) The applicant shall deposit his passport, if any, with the Registry of this Court within a week.

(g) The applicant shall not leave jurisdiction of this Court without seeking prior permission.

8. If the applicant fails to comply the aforesaid directions, liberty to the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail.

9. The application stands disposed of.

[PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]

4 of 4