B.Sivarani v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Sixth day of October Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION Nos.17739 & 17690 of 2021 1 B.SIVARANI 2 K.LOGESHWARI [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED IN CRL.O.P.No.17739/2021 ] 1 A.SIVAGAMI 2 S.GOVINDHAMMAL [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED IN CRL.O.P.No.17690/2021 ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT IN BOTH THE PETITIONS ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB SALEM CITY, SALEM, SALEM DISTRICT CRIME NO.4/2021 For Petitioner : M/S.P.WILSON, Senior Advocate, for M/S.WILSON ASSOCIATES Advocate [IN BOTH THE PETITIONS] For Respondent : MR. C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) [IN BOTH THE PETITIONS] PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

The petitioners/A1 & A5 in Crl.O.P.No.17739 of 2021 & the petitioners/A3 & A4 in Crl.O.P.No.17690 of 2021, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 406, 420, 468, 471, 477A & 506(ii) of I.P.C in Cr.No.4 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the De-facto Complainant claims that she is a managing trustee of Salem Sugam Trust Hospital, salem and she is also claiming her interest over the Salem Sugam Trust Hospital. A1 & A5 are the employees of Dhan Foundation and Sugam Trust hospital whereas A3 & A4 are the office bearers of the Salem Sugam Trust Hospital. It is the further case of the prosecution that the accused colluded with one another and diverted a sum of Rs.77 lakhs, due to which the De-facto Complainant filed a complaint against the petitioner leading to the registration of the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegation is that A1 & A5 are the employees of the Dhan Foundation and Sugsam Trust Hospital whereas A3 & A4 are the office bearers of the Salem Sugam Trust Hospital and they colluded with one another and diverted a sum of Rs.77 lakhs. It is further submitted that the Defacto Complainant is no way connected with Sugam Trust Hospital and Salem and she falsely claims to be the managing trustee. In this regard the Defacto Complainant had already lodged a complaint before the Salem CCB & Madurai CCB and both the investigating agencies refused to take the complaint on file questioning the locus standi. Thereafter the De-facto Complainant filed a complaint u/s 156(3) of Cr.P.C on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Madurai and the same was dismissed.

Again the De-facto Complainant filed Revision Petition before the Madurai Bench in Crl.R.C (MD) No.33 of 2020 which was allowed by order dated 03.09.2021 resulting in the registration of the FIR in Crime No.54 of 2020 by CCB, Madurai, against which SLP was filed, which was also dismissed and the case was transferred to Salem city Police and re-registered as Crime No.4 of 2021. Hence the present petition is filed.

4. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that as the petitioner failed in all the forums, the present false complaint has been filed. It is further submitted that the issue is purely civil in nature and it has been given a Criminal colour and if at all the petitioner is having any grievance, he should avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law before the Civil Court. Accordingly prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

5. It is further submitted that enlarging the petitioner on anticipatory bail would be detrimental to the investigation and accordingly objected to grant bail.

6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that investigation is pending in this case.

7. This Court heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

8. A perusal of the materials reveal that there are disputes relating to the interest over trust in which diversant claims have been made. Though it is the case of the prosecution that the petitioners/accused have diverted huge sums of money, however it is the case of the prosecution that they are the office bearers of the trust. But no material whatsoever is placed before this Court to show that it is the petitioners/accused who have indulged in the said act. Though other materials have been placed to show that there have been diversion of funds, for the present, there is no material to show that the said diversion was done by the petitioners except for the allegation and investigation in the case is still underway. In view of the fact that no material pointing to the collusive act of the petitioners having been placed before this Court at this point of time by the prosecution, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

9. Accordingly, the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail and they are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No-IV, Salem on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each, with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

(a) if the petitioners failed to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled; (b)the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; (c)the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

(d)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(e)the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(f)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and; (g)if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

-sd/- 06/10/2021 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.IV, SALEM.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE SALEM DISTRICT. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CCB SALEM CITY, SALEM, SALEM DISTRICT.

+2 CC to M/S.WILSON ASSOCIATES Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO. 11184 & 11185 CRL OP Nos.17739 & 17690 of 2021 Date :06/10/2021 RW 01/11/2021