G.Sheeba v. The State Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN G.Sheeba ... Petitioner

Versus

The State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chits and Kanthuvatti Wing, Alpha - 5, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Revision is filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, to call for the records in Crl.M.P.No.31953 of 2024 against C.C.No.7295 of 2021 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Additional Court for CCB Cases, at Egmore, Chennai and set aside the order dated 18.07.2024 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Additional Court for CCB Cases, at Egmore, Chennai in Crl.M.P.No.31953 of 2024 in C.C.No.7295 of 2021. For Petitioner : Mr. K. M. Mirthunjayan For Respondent : Mr. A. Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The revision has been filed against the order dated 18.07.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.31953 of 2024 in C.C.No.7295 of 2021 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Additional Court for CCB cases, at Egmore, Chennai, thereby dismissing the petition filed to return the documents of the petitioner.

2.

The petitioner is the accused and facing trial in C.C.No.7295 of 2021 for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 501(i) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), and Section 4(1) r/w Section 76(1) of the Tamil Nadu Chit Fund Act, 1982.

3.

In pursuance of the registration of the First Information Report, the eight properties' original title deeds were seized from the petitioner and deposited before the Trial Court. While the trial was pending, the petitioner filed an application seeking return of the seized documents one by one, so that she could sell the properties and settle the dues to the victims. The said petition was dismissed by the Trial Court. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court in revision.

4.

In view of the above, this Court, by order dated 12.08.2025

directed the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent to ascertain the market value as well as guideline value of the seized properties.

5.

As directed by this Court, the learned Government Advocate submitted a copy of letter from the Registration Department, vide Na.Ka.No.269 of 2025, dated 18.08.2025, and the same was taken on record. 6.

According to the learned Government Advocate, as per the letter dated 18.08.2025, the value of eight properties is now worth Rs.9,71,820/-. More particularly, he stated that the land which is situated in Ponneri measuring 630 sq.ft., is worth Rs.200/- per sq.ft; the land measuring in 1250 sq.ft., in Thiruvathipuram is worth Rs.60/- per sq.ft.,; likewise, Villupuram lands are worth Rs.130/- per sq.ft and Rs.934/- per sq.ft.,; and Uthiramerur lands are worth Rs.1000/- to Rs.1200/- per sq.ft. However, the amount claimed by the victims is Rs.60,00,000/-. Therefore, if the petitioner is permitted to sell the properties, it won't fetch the amount that is due to the victims.

7.

In response, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

all the properties are worth more than the amount mentioned by the prosecution. Especially, the land in Ponneri is more than Rs.300/- per sq.ft, and nowadays, the properties cannot be purchased anywhere for Rs.60/- per sq.ft, or Rs.100/- per sq.ft in that area. Further, he stated that the values of the properties are not correct. The amount due to the victims is only Rs.23,90,700/- and not Rs.60 Lakhs as alleged by the prosecution. 8.

I have heard the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent and have also perused the materials available on record, including the copy of the letter dated 18.08.2025. 9.

After hearing both sides, it is seen that now, the trial is under progress. So far, the prosecution has examined P.W.1 to P.W.13. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, keeping the properties in Court custody would serve no purpose. Since the petitioner is ready and willing to sell the property to settle the due of the victims, and according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the due is only Rs.23,90,700/-. This Court is inclined to issue a suitable directions. 10.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court

issues the following directions:- i) The Trial Court is directed to handover the title deeds to the Registration of Chits;

ii) The Registrar of Chits is directed to conduct an auction to the properties which were seized by the Trial Court from the Court custody, and sell the petitioner properties one by one to realize the settlement for the victims;

iii) If the victims are settled from the sale proceeds of the properties, the remaining property documents shall be returned to the petitioner; iv) The Registrar of Chits is directed to deposit the sale proceeds with the Trial Court, and thereafter, the Trial Court shall settle the amount due to the victims.

11.

In view of the above directions, this Criminal Revision Case is disposed of.

19.08.2025 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking Order Neutral Case Citation ; Yes/No klt G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

klt To 1.The Metropolitan Magistrate, Additional Court for CCB Cases, at Egmore, Chennai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chits and Kanthuvatti Wing, Alpha - 5, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. 19.08.2025