Tr. A. BABU v. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

1. Heard.

2. Leave granted.

3. The appellant[1] (A-4) and the co-accused persons[2] faced trial before the Ld. ASJ, Additional

2 The other accused namely are, Indirakumari/Accused No.1, wife of appellant herein (A-4); T.K. Kirubakaran/Accused No.2, Secretary to the Government, Social Welfare and Nutritious Scheme (A-2); Dr. P. Shanmugam/Accused No.3, Director of Rehabilitation of the Disabled (A-

3) and R. Venkatakrishnan/Accused No.5, junior P.A. to A-1 (A-5). Special Court[3] for the criminal cases relating to elected MPs and MLAs, Chennai. They were charged for criminal misconduct under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988,[4] criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of grant-in-aid funds amounting to Rs.15,45,000/-. These grants were made for running schools for the welfare of ‘Severely Orthopedically Handicapped Children’ and ‘Deaf’ children. A-2 died during pendency of the trial and thus, the trial against him stood abated. Vide judgment dated 29th September, 2001, the trial Court acquitted A-5 and convicted appellant (A-4) and other co-accused persons(A-1) and (A-3) and sentenced them as below.:- Accused(s) Sections Sentence Appellant/Accused-4 Section 120(B) read with Section 409 IPC read with 13(2) Sentenced to undergo 5 years rigorous imprisonment 3 Hereinafter, referred to as ‘trial Court’.

4 Hereinafter, referred to as ‘PC Act’. read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act and Section 109 read with Section 409 IPC and Section 109 IPC read with Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment. Indirakumari/ Accused No.1 (wife of the appellant) Section 120(B) IPC read with read with read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act and and read with undergo 5 years rigorous undergo 6 Dr. P. Shanmugam Accused No. 3 Section 120(B) IPC read with read with read with and Section 409 and read with undergo 3 years rigorous undergo 6

4. The appellant and his wife Indirakumari (A-1) preferred a joint Criminal Appeal No. 545 of 2021 before the High Court to challenge their conviction and sentences as awarded by the trial Court. During the pendency of the appeal, Indirakumari (A-1) passed away and thus, her appeal stood abated. The appeal preferred by the appellant (A-4) has been rejected by the High Court vide judgment dated 5th September, 2024, and hence, this appeal by special leave.

5. On 14th February, 2025, Shri S. Nagamuthu, learned senior counsel for the appellant, confined his submissions to the question of sentence only and urged that, while reducing the sentence, the fine amount may be enhanced, which may be directed to be utilised for the benefit of the specially-abled children. Accordingly, limited notice was issued on the aspect of sentence and the prayer for grant of bail. Further, on the submissions/offer made by Shri S. Nagamuthu on 14th February, 2025, as an interim measure, an amount of Rs. 50 lakhs was directed to be deposited with the Registry of this Court. The same has been complied with.

6. Today, the matter has been taken up for consideration of the application for bail/suspension of sentence filed on behalf of the appellant.

7. On a perusal of the record, it transpires that the charges against the appellant (A-4) and the other coaccused persons[5] were of misappropriating the funds, for their own benefits, which were meant to be used for institutions for specially-abled children. Indirakumari (A-1), being the wife of the appellant herein (A-4) was the Minister for Social Welfare and Nutritious Meals Scheme, who registered two trusts, namely M/s. Mercy Mother India Charitable Trust and M/s Bharani Swathi Educational Trust, wherein the appellant (A-4) and the mother of Indirakumari (A-1) were appointed as trustees. The appellant (A-4) was appointed as a lifelong managing trustee vested with all the powers and functions of the trusts. A

5 Supra Note 2. sum of Rs. 15,45,000/- was sanctioned by way of grant-in-aid to these trusts by the social welfare department. On a complaint being filed, the matter was investigated, and it came to light that the grantin-aid was sanctioned without conducting proper audit and inspection. A huge sum of money was bestowed by way of grant-in-aid to schools for handicapped children which were not even in existence.

8. Shri S. Nagamuthu, learned senior counsel, tried to urge that the appellant was implicated in this case only on the ground of him being a managing trustee of the above-mentioned two trusts and that he had no active role to play in the alleged criminal misconduct and/or misappropriation. However, he was not in a position to dispute that the grant-in-aid to the tune of Rs. 15,45,000/- was extended without entitlement, audit or inspection and that several of the beneficiary schools purportedly established by the respective trusts were not even in existence.

9. We find that so far as the findings of the trial Court and the appellate Court regarding the charges of criminal misconduct and criminal breach of trust and misappropriation attributed to Indirakumari (A-

1) are concerned, the same have attained finality because the appeal against conviction filed on behalf of the said accused has abated.

10. Shri S. Nagamuthu has not challenged the conviction of the appellant (A-4). His submission was that the appellant (A-4), who is now about 68 years old, is repenting and in order to show his bona fides, he is ready to pay an enhanced amount of fine which may be used for restoration/rehabilitation of children in need of care and protection/children in conflict with law as per the mandate of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.