- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Supreme Court Issues Show-Cause...
Supreme Court Issues Show-Cause Notice To Appellant-Convict For Misleading It To Get Favourable Order
Mehal Jain
27 Dec 2020 3:43 AM GMT
The Supreme Court last week issued show-cause notice to a convict for misleading it by producing a wrong copy of a trial court's verdict to get a favourable order which had allowed him to walk free on payment of a fine only in a graft case. The bench of Justices Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose, while issuing the notice to appellant S. Shankar, asked him why it should not recall the order...
The Supreme Court last week issued show-cause notice to a convict for misleading it by producing a wrong copy of a trial court's verdict to get a favourable order which had allowed him to walk free on payment of a fine only in a graft case.
The bench of Justices Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose, while issuing the notice to appellant S. Shankar, asked him why it should not recall the order sparing him the jail term and take "further suitable" action for the act of misleading it.
"After perusal of the Report submitted by the learned Secretary General of the Supreme Court, we are satisfied that the appellant – S. Shankar misled this Court by producing wrong copy of the judgment dated 31.12.2000 passed by the Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad. Let, therefore, show-cause notice be issued to the appellant – S. Shankar as to why order dated 23.07.2019, passed by this Court, be not recalled and modified, and further suitable action be not taken against him", directed the bench.
The appellant was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 120ÂB read with 406 (Criminal breach of trust) of the IPC as well as section 406 separately. The judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court was confirmed by the first appellate Court.
Hearing an appeal against the judgment of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh High Court at Hyderabad, a bench headed by Justice N. V. Ramana had perused the operative portion of the trial court's judgment. "From the aforesaid conclusion, it is amply clear that Accused No. 5 in C.C. No. 86 of 1996 was convicted for the offence under Section 120ÂB read with Section 406, IPC and for the offence under Section 406, IPC separately. He was only sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/Â on each count, thus totalling Rs. 1,000/Â, and in default to undergo one month's simple imprisonment. No sentence of imprisonment was passed against him", noted the bench in its judgment of July 23, 2019.
The bench, also comprising Justices Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and Ajay Rastogi, had observed, "Mr. R. Basant, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, is justified in arguing that the High Court had wrongly construed the operative portion of the judgment of the Trial Court as one imposing a sentence of imprisonment of one year against the appellant"
"Since we find that the Trial Court had merely imposed a sentence of payment of fine of Rs. 1,000/Â on the appellant, the judgment of the High Court is clarified accordingly. In view of the above, the appeal stands disposed of, making it clear that no sentence of imprisonment was imposed (...)", reads the July, 2019 judgment.
Thereafter, the Registrar General, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad has sent a letter dated 31.10.2019 along with annexures seeking clarification from the Supreme Court about the sentence imposed against A5 (S.Shankar).
On February 3, the bench headed by Justice Ramana had noted that "Learned counsel appearing for the appellant – Accused 5 (S. Shankar) in Criminal Appeal No.1463 of 2009 submits that the Trial Court's Judgment produced by him before this Court was the same which he got from the Trial Court and according to him, he has not deleted any sentence as mentioned in the Trial Court's Judgment".
Accordingly, the bench had directed the Secretary General of the Supreme Court to verify the said statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and submit a Report to this Court as early as possible.
[Read Order]
