G.Rajendran v. The State Rep.By Its, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR AND CRL MP NO. 2317 OF 2026 G.Rajendran S/o. Govindan, No.1/104-A, Muthampatty Village, Musiri Taluk, Muthampatti, Tiruchirapalli, Tamil Nadu - 621 211.

..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The State Rep.by its, The Inspector of Police, Kallakurichi Police Station, Kallakurichi District.

2. Anjali W/o. Muthusamy, South Street, Porpadakurichi, Thatchur Post, Kallakurichi.

3. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Kallakurichi [impleaded vide order dated 24.06.2026 by MNKJ] ..Respondent(s) To call for the records the FIR Crime No.234/2017 pending on the file of the Kallakurichi Police Station, Kallakurichi.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.R.Premanandhan For Respondent(s):

Mr.M.Sriram Order The petitioner, who is the third accused in Crime No. 234 of 2017 for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC, has filed the present petition seeking quashing of the proceedings.

2.

The contention of the petitioner is that he is not aware of the activities and functioning of the Mother India Charitable Trust. According to him, he is merely a trustee and has no role in the day-to-day functioning of the organisation. The petitioner has produced the Trust Deed in support of his contention. He has also produced his bank statements to demonstrate that there were no financial transactions between him and the Trust. Further, he has filed his EPF account statement to show that he was employed in a private company at Karur during the relevant period.

3.

The petitioner submits that he has been falsely implicated in the case solely because Accused No. 1 is his brother and Accused No. 2 is the wife

of Accused No. 1. Apart from such familial relationship, he has no connection with the activities of Accused Nos. 1 and 2. He further states that he is an Advocate and completed his legal studies at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Law Institute, Tirupati. Relying upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner contends that even after the filing of the charge sheet, proceedings are liable to be quashed where the foundational facts constituting the offence are absent.

4.

The learned Government Counsel strongly opposed the petitioner's contentions and submitted that the petitioner was one of the principal persons who, along with his brother and sister-in-law, established a charitable trust under the name and style of Mother India Charitable Trust. Though the Trust was projected as an organisation intended to run and maintain educational institutions, assist the poor, and undertake other social welfare activities, the investigation revealed that it existed only in name and did not carry out such charitable functions.

5.

During the course of investigation, it was found that, apart from the Mother India Charitable Trust, the petitioner and the other accused were also operating MLCF and another organisation.

6.

The prosecution alleges that the accused collected a sum of Rs. 9,000/- from the defacto complainant and others by assuring them that, upon payment of the said amount, they would be sanctioned loans of Rs. 1,00,000/-. Acting on such representations, several self-help groups made payments. In total, amounts were collected from 13 self-help groups consisting of 289 members, each paying Rs. 9,000/-, totally Rs. 26,00,000/-. The demand drafts were paid in favour of Accused Nos. 1, 2, and 3. Thereafter, when the self-help groups demanded repayment, the petitioner and Accused No. 2 directed them to come to K.K. Nagar, Chennai. Subsequently, cheques were issued to them. However, the cheques purportedly issued in the name of Tata AIA Insurance were found to be forged.

7.

According to the prosecution, there are sufficient materials to show that the petitioner was actively involved in the affairs of the Trust and that there are specific overt acts attributed against him. The case, therefore, involves allegations of cheating and misappropriation. 8.

In view of the above circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings arising out of the FIR pending on the file of Kallakurichi Police Station, Kallakurichi.

9.

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 24-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order RKA To

1. The State Rep.by its, The Inspector of Police, Kallakurichi Police Station, Kallakurichi District.

2. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Kallakurichi

M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.

RKA AND CRL MP NO. 2317 OF 2026 24-06-2026