LAWS(MAD)-1998-10-140

K. SELVARAJ AND Vs. THE STATE, REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION, SALEM. (RESPONDENT IN CRL. M.P. NO. 4267/97 AND PETITIONER IN CRL. M.P. NO. 8211 OF 98 (RESPONDENT IN DO)

Decided On October 28, 1998
K. Selvaraj And Appellant
V/S
State, Rep. By The Inspector Of Police, Vigilance And Anti -Corruption, Salem. (Respondent In Crl. M.P. No. 4267/97 And Petitioner In Crl. M.P. No. 8211 Of 98 (Respondent In Do) Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE application in Crl.M.P. No. 4267 of 1997 in this Crl. Appeal No. 616/97 was filed by the petitioners -appellants 1 and 3 under Section 482 of Crl.P.C. to pass an order staying the operation of the Judgment of conviction passed by the Special Judge -Cum -First Additional Sessions Judge -Cum -Chief Judicial Magistrate at Salem in C.C. No. 194/89 dated 31.7.1997 pending disposal of the Criminal Appeal No. 616/97 on the file of the High Court of Madras. An ex parte order of stay of the operation of the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 31.7.1997 in C.C. No. 194/89 was passed by this Court following the decision of N.V. Balasubramaniam, J. of this Court reported in Sundari v. The General Manager, Industrial Relations Sections : (1997 2 L.W. 917 at page 922 and at the end of para 6). The learned Judge in the decision reported in at page 922 has referred to a decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reported in : 1990 Cri.L.J.167 and further made some observation stating that the order of conviction is a part of the Judgment and when the Judgment is stayed, the conviction portion of the Judgment is also suspended during the pendency of the appeal.

(2.) CHALLENGING this order dated 10.9.1997 passed by me in Crl.M.P. No. 4267 of 1997, the State represented by the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Salem has filed the application in Crl.M.P. No. 8211/98 to vacate the stay granted in Crl.M.P. No. 4267/97 dated 10.9.1997 staying the operation of the Judgment of conviction passed against the appellants 1 and 3, who are the petitioners in Crl.M.P. No. 4267/97.

(3.) POINT : Before considering the respective contentions of both parties, it is relevant to note that the petitioners in Crl.M.P. No. 4267/97 viz., the appellants 1 and 3 have also filed another application under Section 482 of Crl.P.C. in Crl.M.P. No. 3954 of 1997 to suspend the order of sentence alone dated 31.7.1997 made in C.C. No. 194/89, and in the said application in Crl.M.P. No. 3954/97 I have passed an order staying that the sentence passed by the Special Judge -Cum -First Additional Sessions Judge -Cum -Chief Judicial Magistrate, Salem in C.C. No. 194/89 dated 31.7.1997 is suspended and the petitioners shall be enlarged on bail, on each of them executing a bond for a sum of Rs. 3,000/ - with the sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Special Judge -Cum -First Additional Sessions Judge -Cum -Chief Judicial Magistrate, Salem. Apart from this order in the application in Crl.M.P. No. 3954/97 the petitioners, who are the appellants 1 and 3, have filed yet another application in Crl.M.P. No. 4267/97, wherein the operation of Judgment of conviction in C.C. No. 194/89 was also stayed pending disposal of the Criminal Appeal in the light of the decision of N.V. Balasubramanian, J. - -reported in : 1997 2 L.W. 917, at page 922, Now this Order in Crl.M.P. No. 4267/97 is being challenged in Crl.M.P. No. 8211/98.