Premium
This is an archive article published on June 27, 2000

SC suspends Chennai court verdict on Haribhaskaran

NEW DELHI, JUNE 26: The Supreme Court today suspended the sentence of five years' rigorous imprisonment imposed by a Chennai special court...

.

NEW DELHI, JUNE 26: The Supreme Court today suspended the sentence of five years’ rigorous imprisonment imposed by a Chennai special court on former Tamil Nadu chief secretary N Haribhaskaran, one of the seven accused in the Rs 10.16-crore colour TV scam case.

Haribhaskaran’s plea against the special court verdict of May 30 was rejected by the Madras High Court on June 8. The special court had convicted him and six others, including AIADMK MP and former state minister T M Selvaganapathy. AIADMK supremo J Jayalalitha was acquitted.

A two-judge vacation bench comprising Justice K T Thomas and Justice M B Shah today suspended the sentence and also granted interim bail to Haribhaskaran while disposing off his special leave petition against the Madras High Court order refusing him bail.

Story continues below this ad

The Supreme Court, however, made it clear that if Haribhaskaran happened to prolong the hearing or appeal for which the high court had suggested a period of two months, it would be open to the state government to seek rescinding of today’s order.

The court earlier recorded a plea of additional solicitor-general Altaf Ahmed, appearing for the Tamil Nadu government, that the high court itself had said that the appeal in the case would be heard in two months. Suspension of the sentence might lead to adoption of dilatory tactics by the petitioner.

The appeal of the petitioner against the judgement of the special court is already pending before the high court. The state government had also filed an appeal before the high court against the special court judgment acquitting Jayalalitha.

Besides Haribhaskaran and Selvaganapathy, two IAS officers — H M Pandey and M Sathiamoorthy — were among those sentenced to five years’ rigorous imprisonment by the trial court.

Story continues below this ad

The high court had interpreted that suspension of sentence and bail, under section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code, called for restraint.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement