M/S.Aphro Trust, v. The Superintendent Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.07.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Crl.O.P.No.7211 of 2018 M/s Aphro Trust Rep. by its Founder and President I.P.Yesudoss S/o Panchanathan No.24, 2nd Cross Street VMK Nagar, Surapet Main Road Vinayagapuram Chennai 600 099.
.. Petitioner/Party in person Vs 1.The Superintendent of Police Head Quarters, EOW-2 No.C-48, Block-2 Sidco Old Corporate Office Building Guindy Chennai 600 032.
2.S.Arumugam S/o G.Selvaraj Sub-Inspector of Police Central Crime Branch, Team-1 Commissioner of Police Building EVK Sampath Road Vepery, Chennai 600 007.
3.Radhika Deputy Commissioner of Police Central Crime Branch, Team-1 Commissioner of Police Building EVK Sampath Road Vepery,Chennai 600 007.
4.Inspector of Police Kurinjipadi Police Station Cuddalore District.
5.Vasanthan Chief General Manager Reserve Bank of India Fort Glacis Chennai 600 001.
6.The Chief Editor Daily Thanthi No.86, EVK Sampath Road Vepery Chennai 600 007.
7.The Chief Editor Junior Vikatan No.757, Anna Salai Chennai 600 002.
..Respondents Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to direct to remove the non prima facie sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC in FIR No.396 of 2012 which was registered suo motu and arbitrarily by police and to direct RBI to initiate action u/s 58(B)(1) RBI Act in an appropriate court. For Petitioner : Mr.I.P.Yesudoss (Party-in-Person) For R1 : Mr.C.Emalias Public Prosecutor Assisted by Mrs.Kritika Kamal P.
Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For R6 : Mr.V.Sanjeevi For R7 : Mr.N.Ramesh
O R D E R
On the complaint lodged by S.Arumugam, Sub-Inspector of Police, the Central Crime Branch has registered a case in Cr.No.396 of 2012 for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 120B IPC and Section 58(B)(1) of the Reserve Bank of India Act. This petition has been filed with a peculiar prayer to remove non prima facie sections from the FIR in Cr.No.396 of 2012.
2. Heard Mr. I.P.Yesudoss (Party-in-Person) and Mr.C.Emalias, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. Mr.Yesudoss contended that he was not conducting the business of Microfinance and that he had only helped women selfhelp groups by arranging finance for their business. He further submitted that based on a newspaper report, the FIR has been registered and therefore, it is clearly an abuse of process of law. It is his further contention that the police have registered eight FIRs against him, whereas, the same is not permissible.
4. At the outset, the prayer for alteration of the FIR is not maintainable under Section 482 Cr.P.C., since, unlike the Code of Civil Procedure, where the pleadings can be amended, the FIR cannot be altered on the directions of the Court. It is common knowledge that FIR is not an encyclopaedia of the
prosecution case. During investigation, it is always open to the respondent police to either add to the penal sections or delete certain sections, depending upon the evidence collected by them. Under such circumstances, the present prayer of the petitioner is misconceived.
In the result, this petition stands dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar gms To 1.The Superintendent of Police Head Quarters, EOW-2 No.C-48, Block-2 Sidco Old Corporate Office Building Guindy Chennai 600 032.
2. The Inspector of Police Kurinjipadi Police Station Cuddalore District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.V.Sanjeevi, Advocate sr.no.43324 +1cc to Mr.N.Ramesh, Advocate sr.no.43743 Crl.O.P.No.7211 of 2018 vgii(co) nr 16/07/2018