Suganthi v. State Of Tamil Nadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.01.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM Crl.R.C.Nos.1035,1036 and 1040 of 2015 and M.P.Nos.1,1,1 of 2015 and Crl.M.P.Nos.10168,10169 and 10170 of Suganthi ... Petitioner in Crl.R.C.No.1035 of 2015 R.Shanmugasundaram ... Petitioner in Crl.R.C.No.1036 of 2015 Varadharajan@Varadhaiyan ... Petitioner in Crl.R.C.No.1040 of 2015 Vs.
1.State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By Deputy Superintendent Of Police E.O.W.-Wing II Coimbatore Crime No.3/99)(Crime No.---) 2 B.Chinnasamy 3 V.Sivagami 4 C.Sarathamani 5 S.Ponnusamy 6 P.Kalaiarasi 7 N.Ponnusamy 8 P.Saraswathi 9 S.Subbammal 10 S.Punitha 11 K.Thilakambal 12 Karaikkal 13 L.Anandhakumar 14 N.Subbaiyan 15 Pujjammal 16 Barathamani
17 N.Visalatchi 18 Geetha 19 A.Kalyanasundaram 20 Sundarammal 21 R.Gandhimathi 22 Savithiriammal 23 N.Sulochana 24 A.Easwar Gowder 25 Subbammal 26 Rangarajan 27 Murugaiyan 28 M.Nithiyanandan 29 M.Nagarathinam 30 A.K.Manokaran 31 B.Rengasamy Gowder 32 R.Selvaraj 33 R.Duraisamy 34 T.Thirumayam 35 Rajesh Kumar 36 V.Rengarajan 37 Logavathani 38 Sarojadevi 39 K.Krishnasamy 40 P.Kannammal 41 D.Palanisamy 42 T.Varadhaiyan 43 C.Rengasamy 44 P.G.Rengasamy 45 Kalaisalvi 46 K.N.Aruvappan 47 Sampathkumar 48 C.Rangaiya Gowder 49 Rajappan 50 T.Elangovan 51 Pushpa 52 R.Thottanna Gowder 53 Subbammal 54 T.Duraisamy 55 Kokila 56 N.Saroja 57 R.Subbaiyan 58 T.Ramamoorthy 59 N.Sivasamy 60 S.Saraswathi 61 K.Rangasamy 62 K.Nanjaya Gowder 63 Thulasiammal 64 Tmt.Rathna @ M.Rathinam 65 Tmt.G.Sakunthala
66 Jayanthi 67 Venkatesan 68 Masiammal 69 M.V.Senthilkumar 70 S.R.Rathinam 71 S.T.Mani 72 B.Santhakumari (respondents 2 to 72 impleaded as per order of this Court dated 26.10.2015) ... Respondents in all revisions Criminal Revisions filed under Section 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. against the order of learned Special Judge, Special Court under TNPID Act cases, Coimbatore, passed in Crl.M.P.Nos.956,957 and 987 of 2012 in C.C.Nos.1,1,1, of 2012 on 07.08.2015. For Petitioners :
Mr.O.S.Thilak Pasumbadiar (in all revisions) For Respondents :
Mr.M.Mohammed Riyaz (in all revisions) GovernmentAdvocate [Crl.side] [R1] No Appearance for R2 to 72 C O M M O N O R D E R These revisions challenge the order of learned learned Special Judge, Special Court under TNPID Act cases, Coimbatore, passed in Crl. M.P. Nos. 956, 957 and 987 of 2012 in C.C. Nos. 1 of 2012 on 07.08.2015, wherein petitioners sought discharge.
2. The petitioners in Cr.R.C.No.1035, 1036 and 1040 of 2015 have been arrayed as A-5, A-4 and A-9 respectively in C.C. No. 1 of 2012 and face prosecution for offences u/s. 420 IPC and Sec.5 of TANPID Act, 1997.
3. Prosecution came to be launched against the accused in C.C. No. 1 of 2012 at the instance of one Chinnasamy, a retired teacher. According to the complainant, he deposited a sum of Rs.2 lakhs received towards his retirement benefits in a finance company run by Shanmuga Sundaram and three others in the name and style of B.R. Finance, B.R.S. Finance and B.R.S.A. Finance at Coimbatore which did not repay the maturity amount to the complainant inspite of his repeated demands. The said finance company has indulged in accepting deposit from various depositors and cheated them to the tune of Rs.2 crores. On the basis of such complaint, a search was conducted by the investigation officer and several documents have been recovered from the office premises of the accused. The accused have obtained anticipatory bail under orders of this Court on various dates. Petitioners have filed petitions for discharge and on
their dismissal, the present Criminal Revision Petitions have been filed.
4.Learned counsel for petitioners submit that so far 97% of depositors dues stand repaid, pursuant to interim order passed by the trial court. Outstanding is only in respect of 3% of depositors. The dues payable to such 3% depositors works out to a sum of Rs.1,51,000/- and such sum has also been paid by way of demand draft drawn on the Indian Bank, Karamadai branch dated 23.02.2016 in favour of Competent Authority/ District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore.
5. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Government Advocate [Crl.side] for first respondent. There is no appearance for respondents 2 to 72.
6. A perusal of the orders under challenge reveal that Court below has allowed discharge petition of other persons while dismissing the same as regards the petitioners since it found them to be signatories of documents and other incriminating material against them. Thus, it is seen that Court below has dismissed the petition seeking discharge in so far as these petitioners are concerned, since it was of the view that a prima facie case was made out against them. We find no reason to interfere with such orders of the court below. Accordingly, all the Criminal Revision Cases are dismissed. In the circumstances, this Court would leave it open to the Court below to proceed u/s. 5(A) of TANPID Act on its being satisfied regards the application thereof. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1 The Special Judge, Special Court under TNPID Act cases, Coimbatore,
2 he Deputy Superintendent of Police, EOW-Wing II, Coimbatore +3cc to Mr.O.S. Thilak Pasum Badiyar, Advocate, S.R.No.992 & 994 (15/02/2017)+2 rv(CO) md(14/02/2017) Crl.R.C.Nos.1035,1036 and 1040 of 2015