A. Pradeep Abhinash Nair v. The State Of Tamil Nadu, Rep By The Director General Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23302 to 23321 of 2025 A.Pradeep Abhinash Nair ... Petitioner in all petitions Vs.

1. The Director General of Police, No.220, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

2. The Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

4. The Inspector of Police - Ccb, Tirunelveli City, Tirunelveli District.

5. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi.

... Respondents in all petitions COMMON PRAYER : Petitions filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 to transfer the investigation in Compliants dated 28.11.2023, which is under investigation now and in Crime No.15/24 dated 03.12.2024 on the file of 4th respondent to 5th respondent.

1/6

Appearance in all petitions:- For Petitioner : Mr.A.Thiyagarajan For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar (R1 to R4) Government Advocate (Crl.) COMMON ORDER These petitions has been filed seeking transfer of the investigation in the complaint dated 28.11.2023, which is presently under investigation by the 4th respondent to the 5th respondent and also in Crime No.15/24 dated 03.12.2024 on the file of 4th respondent to 5th respondent.

2. The petitioner is working as a Cluster Manager in the Loan Section of Catholic Syrian Bank, Tirunelveli, and he has been so appointed as the Authorized Officer of the Finance and Agriculture Wing of Catholic Syrian Bank by virtue of a Power of Attorney. The complaint was originally filed by the earlier Authorized Officer, namely Kasi Rajan, who has since been transferred to another branch/bank. Consequently, the present petitioner has been authorized by way of Power of Attorney.

2/6

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accused persons, along with a former bank employee and brokers, approached the Tirunelveli Branch of the petitioner bank seeking an agricultural loan. Claiming to be long-standing agriculturists and vegetable traders, they furnished bank statements, ITRs, and other documents purportedly bearing Government seals. Relying on the said documents and after completion of formalities, the bank sanctioned OD loans for certain sums to them.

4. It was further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the borrowers defaulted in repayment. Upon verification, the Income Tax Department confirmed that the ITRs submitted were forged. Further enquiry revealed that the loan was obtained by executing a MOD and that the collateral documents, including house tax receipts and building plan permissions, were also forged. When questioned, the accused persons threatened bank officials and claimed influence over authorities. Despite complaints to the 2nd respondent and representations to the Director General of Police, no effective action has been taken, and even where FIRs have been registered in some cases, no progress has been made. Hence, the present petitions have been filed seeking transfer of investigation.

3/6

5. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent police, on instructions, submitted that the complaints were addressed to the Director General of Police, the 1st respondent herein, and were sent by post about two years ago. It was further submitted that the 1st respondent had forwarded the same to the 4th respondent for appropriate action and that, while the matter is pending in some cases, FIR has been registered in some other cases.

6. Heard the learned counsels on either side and carefully perused the materials placed before this Court. Considering the nature of the order proposed to be passed in these petitions, notice to the fifth respondent is dispensed with.

7. Considering that the matter pertains to a money dispute arising out of loan default, the fourth respondent police is directed to expedite the investigation and conclude the same within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The third respondent is directed to monitor the investigation conducted by the fourth respondent. Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are disposed of, directing the fourth 4/6

respondent to appraise the progress of the investigation to the third respondent every Friday.

8. It is made clear that if the complaints have already been registered, the investigation shall proceed in accordance with law; if not, an enquiry shall be conducted.

17.12.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Sm TO:-

1. The Director General of Police, No.220, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.

2. The Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

4. The Inspector of Police - Ccb, Tirunelveli City, Tirunelveli District.

5. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

Sm Common Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.23302 to 23321 of 2025 Dated 17.12.2025 6/6