R.M.Srinivasan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Second day of January Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.22724 of 2014 1 R.M.SRINIVASAN 2 MRS.S.VIBULA ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 2 & 3 Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE E.O.WII, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT, NAGERCOIL.

CR.NO.1/2014. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 1 R.HARRIET KARUNABAI 2 S.RAJU 3 SHEELA NESA MALAR @ SHEELA ... INTERVENING PETITIONERS/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANTS in MP.1/14 in CRL.OP.NO.22724/14 1 S. BAGAVATHI 2 M. ESAKKIAMMAL 3 M. MASANAM 4 D. HANNAHJEYARATHA 5 K. HELEN DAISY RANI @ HELAN 6 S. CHANDRABANU 7 A. NARAYANAN 8 K.MURUGAN 9 M. BALAMURUGAN 10 M. KRISHNAN 11 A.MUTHULAKSHMI ... INTERVENING PETITIONERS/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANTS in MP.2/14 in CRL.OP.NO.22724/14 1 KANNAN 2 K. MUTHULAKSHMI 3 MARYSUSILA 4 P. NARAYANAM 5 N. MUTHULAKSHMI 6 A. SUBBULAKSHMI 7 N. SORNAM 8 M. PETCHIAMMAL 9 M. SUDALAI 10 N. ESAKKIAMMAL ... INTERVENING PETITIONERS/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANTS in MP.3/14 in CRL.OP.NO.22724/14

1 M. PANDARAM 2 M. PALAVESAM 3 M.A. THANGARAJ 4 M. RAJESWARI 5 M. SUDALAIMANI 6 S. THILLAI RAJA 7 V. KALA 8 S. SHANMUGASUNDARAM 9 E. SANTHANARAJ 10 S. SUNDARI ... INTERVENING PETITIONERS/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANTS in MP.4/14 in CRL.OP.NO.22724/14 For Petitioner : M/S.T.SELVAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.C.RAMESH Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) For Interveners : MR.R.JOHN SATHYAN Advocate in MP.1/14 in CRL.OP.NO.22724/14 MR.C.D.JOHNSON Advocate in MP.2/14 in CRL.OP.NO.22724/14 MR.A.R.KANNAPPAN Advocate in MP.3/14 in CRL.OP.NO.22724/14 MR.K.KUMARAVEL Advocate in MP.4/14 in CRL.OP.NO.22724/14 PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 406, 420 r/w.120(b) IPC and Section 5 of TNPID Act, 1997 in Crime No.1 of 2014 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the interveners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the State.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Vibula (A.3) is not a Director in Sun Kunya Developers India Pvt. Ltd. and her husband is a Director.

4.On a reading of the First Information Report, it is clearly stated that Vibula is also taking part in the business of Sun Kunya Developers India Pvt. Ltd. Under the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997, it is not necessary that one should be a Director in a company and it would be sufficient, if he takes part in the affairs of the company. Since 364 persons have been cheated to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-

taking into consideration the magnitude of the offence against the petitioners, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Hence, this petition is dismissed. sd/- 22/01/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE E.O.WII, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT, NAGERCOIL.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.22724 of 2014 Date :22/01/2015 AA/28.01.2015/3p- 3c/