LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/tr-a-babu-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-20250318/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Tr. A. Babu vs State of Tamil Nadu

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
18 March 2025
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 1413 of 2025
Bench
Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta
Citation
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 926 : 2025 INSC 799
Acts & Sections
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Juvenile Justice Act, 2015
Supreme Court Reports [2025] 3 S.C.R. 926 : 2025 INSC 799
Issue for consideration
Matter pertains to the quantum of sentence imposed on the appellant and his release on bail on deposit of enhanced amount of fine.
Headnote

Sentence/sentencing – Suspension of sentence – Payment of enhanced fine – Grant of bail – Wife of the appellant was the Minister for Social Welfare and Nutritious Meals Scheme, who registered two trusts, wherein the appellant and his mother-in-law were appointed as trustees – Appellant, his wife, and the other co-accused misappropriated grant-in-aid funds for their own benefits, which were meant to be used for institutions for specially-abled children – Trial court convicted and sentenced them – Appellant and his wife filed appeal before the High Court – Appeal of the co-accused wife stood abated on her death – High Court rejected the appeal of the appellant – Challenge to:

Held: Findings of the trial court and the appellate court regarding the charges of criminal misconduct and criminal breach of trust and misappropriation attributed to co-accused wife have attained finality – Appellant, now about 68 years old, is repenting and in order to show his bona fides has volunteered to deposit an enhanced fine of Rs.5 crores which may be utilised for the benefit of the specially-abled children – In view thereof, the appellant to be released on bail subject to terms and conditions – Appellant to file an undertaking that he would deposit the balance amount of enhanced fine with the Registry of the Supreme Court and on failure to do so, the bail would be cancelled automatically – Entire amount of Rs.5 crores to be transmitted to the account of the State Legal Services Authority to be invested in an interest-bearing fixed deposit account in a Nationalised bank – Juvenile Justice Committee of the High Court of Tamil Nadu to utilise the interest generated from this amount for the benefit of the Government established/operated childcare institutions in the State – Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. [Paras 9, 10, 14-17 ]

Keywords: Bail · Suspension of sentence · Enhanced fine · Misappropriation of grant-in-aid funds · Minister for Social Welfare and Nutritious Meals Scheme · Mercy Mother India Charitable Trust · Bharani Swathi Educational Trust · Quantum of sentence · Release on bail on deposit of enhanced amount of fine · Institutions for specially-abled children · Criminal misconduct · Criminal breach of trust · Misappropriation · Benefit of the specially-abled children

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Order 1. Heard. 2. Leave granted. 3. The appellant1 (A-4) and the co-accused persons2 faced trial before the Ld. ASJ, Additional Special Court3 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 s
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →