The Supreme Court of India has modified the sentence of K. Pounammal, a former Inspector of Central Excise, who was convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. While upholding her conviction for demanding and accepting a bribe of ₹300 in 2002, the Court reduced her jail term to the period already undergone, considering her age and the prolonged duration of the case. However, the Court increased the fine to ₹25,000.
Case Background
The case dates back to September 2002, when a supervisor from Parani Match Factory in Sivakasi applied for a fresh central excise registration certificate. The application fell under the jurisdiction of Pounammal. According to the prosecution, she demanded an illegal gratification of ₹300 for processing the certificate.
Read also: Kolkata Lawyers Stage Court Boycott Following Brutal Police Attack on Advocate
The complainant lodged a complaint with the CBI after being pressurised. A trap was set, and the accused was caught accepting the money. The phenolphthalein test on her hands confirmed the bribe acceptance. In 2003, a CBI Special Judge convicted her, sentencing her to rigorous imprisonment. The Madras High Court upheld the conviction in 2010.
Pounammal challenged the sentence before the Supreme Court but did not contest her conviction. Her counsel pleaded for leniency, highlighting that the incident occurred over two decades ago, she had already served 31 days in custody, and that she is now a 75-year-old widow living alone.
Read also: Supreme Court Sends Odisha Election Dispute Back to High Court for Fresh Review on Affidavit Defects
Justice N.V. Anjaria and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar considered earlier rulings where courts reduced jail terms in corruption cases involving small bribe amounts when there were long delays.
The bench noted:
“The prolongation of a criminal case for an unreasonable period is in itself a kind of suffering. It amounts to mental incarceration for the person facing such proceedings.”
The Court emphasized that sentencing should balance deterrence with reformation, especially when mitigating factors like age, widowhood, and prolonged litigation are present.
Read also: Delhi High Court Rules Differently in DSSSB Roll Number Bubbling Dispute
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction but modified the sentence:
- Imprisonment already undergone (31 days) treated as adequate.
- Fine increased to ₹25,000, payable by 10th September 2025.
- Failure to pay the fine will revive the original sentence, requiring her to surrender.
Case Name: K. Pounammal vs State Represented by Inspector of Police
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 1716 of 2011
Judgment Date: 21 August 2025
Appellant: K. Pounammal (Former Inspector of Central Excise)
Respondent: State Represented by Inspector of Police
