Kerala High Court
K.K. Vasudevan vs State Of Kerala on 11 September, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
CRL.MC No.6029 of 2017 1
2024:KER:69558
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 20TH BHADRA,
1946
CRL.MC NO. 6029 OF 2017
CRIME NO.2603/2014 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 07.08.2017 IN CC
NO.68 OF 2016 OF
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
K.K. VASUDEVAN
AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. KRISHNAN, KAITHAKKAL HOUSE,
KANDANASSERY, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV RAJIT
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM
2 REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES
ERNAKULAM, KERALA - 682031
3 SAINUDHEEN
AGED 21 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMEDALI, PUTHUVEETTIL
HOUSE, CHAVAKKAD DESOM, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680
506.
4 SREEDHARAN
AGED 55 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, VEEJIKA CHITS
PVT.LTD., KUNNAMKULAM, RESIDING AT ALLUNGAL
CRL.MC No.6029 of 2017 2
2024:KER:69558
HOUSE, KANIPAYYOOR, KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR
DISTRICT - 680 503.
5 INDIRA
AGED 45 YEARS, DIRECTOR, VEEJIKA CHITS PVT.LTD.,
KUNNAMKULAM, RESIDING AT CHAKKUMKERAN HOUSE,
ENGANDIYOOR P.O., CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR
DISTRICT - 680 615.
6 RAKHI
MANAGER, VEEJIKA CHITS PVT.LTD., KUNNAMKULAM
BRANCH, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 503.
7 SHAJAN
AGED 45 YEARS, REGIONAL MANAGER, VEEJIKA CHITS
PVT.LTD., KUNNAMKULAM BRANCH, THRISSUR DISTRICT -
680 503.
8 HASEENA
AGED 45 YEARS, DIRECTOR, VEEJIKA CHITS PVT.LTD.,
KUNNAMKULAM, RESIDING AT KIZHAKKETH HOUSE,
PUNAYOOR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT - 679562
BY ADVS.
SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE KIZHAKKAMBALAM
SRI.V.RAJENDRAN PERUMBAVOOR
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.T.R RENJITH SR PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALY HEARD ON
11.09.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC No.6029 of 2017 3
2024:KER:69558
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
---------------------
CRL.MC No.6029 of 2017
---------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of August, 2024
ORDER
The petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure E order
passed by the Special Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Thrissur in CMP No.1903/2017 in CC No.68/2016 by which
the petitioner is sought to be impleaded as the Managing
Director of the 7th accused company called Veejika Chits
Pvt. Ltd invoking the powers under Section 319(1) Cr.PC.
2. The 3rd respondent filed a complaint before the
DYSP, Thrissur alleging that he had subscribed to a chit run
by Veejika Chits Pvt. Ltd. and despite the termination of the
Chits, he was not paid any amount. In the said complaint,
he described the Petitioner as well as the 4th respondent as
the Managing Director of the company. Annexure A is the
complaint filed by the 3rd respondent before the DYSP.
Annexure A complaint was forwarded by the DYSP,
2024:KER:69558
Kunnamkulam to the Station House Officer, Kunnamkulam
and the Kunnamkulam Police registered Crime No.2603/
2014 against the petitioner and respondent Nos.4, 5 & 8.
Annexure-B is the F.I.R. Thereafter, the Kunnamkulam
Police completed the investigation and filed Final Report
against the Petitioner and respondent Nos.4 to 8.
Annexure-C is the final report. After the filing of Annexure-
C final report, the prosecutor has filed an application under
Section 319 Cr.PC stating that in order to have an effective
prosecution, it is necessary to array the company Veejika
Chits Funds as an additional accused and accordingly, it
was prayed that Veejika Chits Funds represented by its
Managing Director, Vasudevan, S/o.Krishna should be
impleaded as an additional accused. Annexure-D is the
application. Annexure-D application was allowed as per
Annexure E order. Aggrieved by Annexure E order, this
Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
2024:KER:69558
the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure E order to the
extent the same makes him the Managing Director of the
Company Veejika Chits Pvt. Ltd. According to the petitioner,
there was a chitty company by the name Veejika Chits Pvt
Ltd, which was started by the 4th respondent having its
office at Kunnamkulam. According to the petitioner, he was
not a founder or promoter of the said Company. The
petitioner was approached by the 4th respondent in October,
2010 requesting the petitioner to invest money in the said
company and also to lend the goodwill earned by the
petitioner from his hotel business, to the company is the
submission. It is also submitted by the petitioner that the
4th respondent requested the petitioner to become a joint
Managing Director along with the 4th respondent of the said
company. The petitioner believing the words of the 4 th
respondent, became Managing Director of the company in
2024:KER:69558
2010 is the submission. According to the petitioner,
subsequently he came to know that he had not been
apprised of the manner of functioning of the said company
and petitioner came to know that he did not have the
requisite experience to run the business of the Chitty
Company. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner
resigned from the Board of Director on 11.11.2012.
Annexure F is the resignation letter. It is submitted that the
Board of Directors of Veejika Chits Pvt.Ltd had accepted the
resignation of the petitioner from the Board of Directors in
the meeting of the Board of Directors held on 20.11.2012.
Annexure-G is the resolution of the Board of Directors of
Veejika Chits Pvt.Ltd is the submission. It is further
submitted that the resignation of the petitioner from the
Board of Directors of Veejika Chits Pvt.Ltd was recorded by
the Registrar of Companies as per Form 32 and the
Registrar of Companies had recorded the removal of the
petitioner from the Board of Directors w.e.f. 20.11.2012.
Therefore, it is submitted that in view of Annexures E to H,
2024:KER:69558
it is improper to array the petitioner as an accused styling
him to the Managing Director of Veejika Chits Pvt. Ltd.
According to the petitioner, he ceased to be the Managing
Director of the company much prior to the filing of the
complaint by the 3rd respondent itself. It is submitted that
Annexure A complaint was filed on 22.8.2014 and the
petitioner had resigned as the Managing Director w.e.f
20.11.2012. Hence, it is submitted that arraying the
petitioner as Managing Director of the company Veejika
Chits Pvt. Ltd. is without conducting any proper enquiry.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that
there is nothing to interfere with the impugned order and
the learned Magistrate considered all the facts before
passing the impugned orders.
6. This Court considered the contentions of the
petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. This Court perused
Annexure E order. First all, Annexure E order is not a
speaking order. It is an order passed by the Court in a
2024:KER:69558
mechanical manner. Annexure D is the petition filed by the
Assistant Public Prosecutor to invoke Section 319 Cr.PC. A
perusal of Annexure D would not show that any material is
produced by the Public Prosecutor to implead the petitioner
as the Managing Director of Veejika Chits Pvt. Ltd. In such
circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the
learned Magistrate erred in allowing the petition filed by the
Public Prosecutor even without verifying the fact that,
whether the petitioner can represent the company or not.
Moreover, the apex court in Hardeep Singh and Others
vs. State of Punjab and Others (2014(1) KHC 170)
observed that the powers under Section 319 Cr.PC can be
exercised only on the basis of evidence adduced before the
Court during the trial. Application under Section 319 Cr.PC
at the stage of inquiry remains limited to adding a person
as an accused, whose name has been mentioned in Column
No.2 of the charge sheet or any other person who might be
an accomplice.
2024:KER:69558
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned
order can be set aside. But, I make it clear that, if there are
sufficient materials produced by the prosecution at the time
of trial, the prosecution is free to file a fresh application
under Section 319 Cr.PC or even the court can do the
needful to invoke Section 319 Cr.PC in accordance with law.
With the above observations, this Criminal
Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Annexure E order dated
07.08.2017 in CMP No.1903/2017 in CC No.68/2016 of the
Special Additional Chief Juidical Magistrate, Thrissur is set
aside.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
bng
2024:KER:69558
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE DYSP.
ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
2603/2014 OF THE KUNNAMKULAM POLICE.
ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT FILED BY
THE KUNNAMKULAM POLICE.
ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY
THE ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.
ANNEXURE E TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 07.08.2017
IN CMP NO. 1903/2017 IN C.C.NO.68/2016
OF THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE, THRISSUR ARISING FROM CRIME
2603/2014 OF THE KUNNAMKULAM POLICE
STATION.
ANNEXURE F TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION LETTER
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF VEEJIKA CHITS
PVT.LTD.
ANNEXURE G TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION TAKEN BY
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF VEEJIKA CHITS
PVT.LTD DTD. 20.11.2012.
ANNEXURE H TRUE COPY IF THE FORM NO. 32 DTD.
20.11.2012.
