Madras High Court
B. Abinaya vs State Through on 23 February, 2022
Crl. A(MD) No. 74 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 23.02.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl. A(MD) No. 74 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P(MD) No.2704 of 2022
1. B. Abinaya
2. B. Usha : Appellants
Vs.
State through
Deputy Superintendent of Police
Economic Offence Wing-II
Madurai : Respondent
PRAYER: The Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 11 of Tamil Nadu
Protection of Interest of Depositors(in Financial Establishment), Act, 1997
to call for the entire records along with other materials and documents
submitted by the prosecution on the file of the Special Court under
TANPID Act Cases, Madurai, made in Cr.M.P. No.164 of 2021 in C.C.No.
13/2019 dated 24.11.2021 and to set aside the same by allowing this
Appeal
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl. A(MD) No. 74 of 2022
For Appellants : Mr.. K.Kumaravel
For R1 : Mrs.Asha
Additional Public Prosecutor
JUDGMENT
The present Criminal Appeal has been filed to call for the entire
records along with other materials and documents submitted by the
prosecution on the file of the Special Court under TANPID Act Cases,
Madurai made in Cr.M.P. No.164 of 2021 in C.C.No. 13/2019 dated
24.11.2021 and to set aside the same by allowing this Appeal
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant,
one Radhakrishnan of Thiruthangal, Virudhunagar District, came to know
about the ''Maathru Farms Pvt. Ltd.,'' situated at Bhuvaneswar and
Madurai, which was jointly managed by C.Ramachandran (A3),
K.Krishnakumari (A4) and R.Ramanathan @ Sankar and that the said
company had multiple branches all over Tamil Nadu and various attractive
financial schemes which provide attractive interest for such investments
with additional bonus of 14% and other benefits. The defacto complainant
came to know about this through the agent one Shanmugavel (died) and
at the instance of T.Meenakshi Sundaram, Joint Director of A2 Company
and also instigation of Bose and others, defacto complainant became one
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl. A(MD) No. 74 of 2022
of the agents of that A2 Financial Institution. On believing the enchanting
words of this agent, Shanmugavel, LW1/defacto complainant/(Agent)
approached directly the Company at Madurai where he contacted the
Directors namely C.Ramachandran (A3), R.Krishnakumari (A4) and
R.Ramanathan @ Sankar (A5). Based on the schemes information and
enchanting words of ''more interest and also about additional benefits such
as Bonus, accident benefits'', LW1/the defacto complainant/
(Agent),R.Radhakrishnan had made some deposits to a total amount of
Rs.1,67,000/- on various dates for various amounts in his name, in the
name of his son R.Jegadeesaran and in the name of his wife Valarmathi,
for which printed bonds signed by the Director viz., C.Ramachandran (A3).
On maturity, when the defacto complainant approached A1 company at
Madurai, on 01.10.2011, 08.12.2016 of on 24.10.2017, the above said 3
Directors, they got back the original documents by promising them that
the amount would be returned within a month.
3. Further,on 06.03.2017, when the defacto complainant
approached for refund of matured amount as promised by to above three
Directors, to the Madurai Office, it seems that it was locked. Then. he
approached the Corporate Office at Vellore 18.06.2017 and found that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl. A(MD) No. 74 of 2022
office was under lock. LW1/defacto complainant made a complaint on
18.01.2017 to D.S.P. EOW-II, Vellore to take action against the erring A1
and A2 Companies and the Directors (1) Ramachandran,
(2)R.S.Krishnakumari and (3) R.Ramanathan and also other responsible
person. It was also taken on file in Cr.No.2/2017 of Vellore, EOW II, on
18.06.2017 under Sections 406, 420, 120(b) of I.P.C. and Section 5 of
TANPID Act, 1997. On the basis of the FIR, investigation was made by the
EOW-II, Vellore and at that time they received 75 stereo typed complaints
from General People/investors. But no separate FIR was registered.
Subsequently, it was seen from the records, that EOW-II, Vellore after
completing its initial investigation, transferred the case to EOW-II, Madurai
for further investigation. The DSP, EOW-II, Madurai registered the said
TANPID Act 1977 transferred case in Cr.No.7/2018 u/s 206, 420, 120(b)
IPC and Sec.5 of TANPID Act.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents and
perused the materials available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl. A(MD) No. 74 of 2022
5. The only ground raised by the petitioners is that they are
relatives and they are family members of the other accused. There are
sleeping partners and they are not benefitted from the Company. A
perusal of the records reveals that the petitioners are holding 250 shares
in Maathru Farms Private Limited. That apart, they have not received any
profit from the Company. The Company received so far 600 depositors
on false promise and thereby cheated them without returning the matured
amounts. There are materials to frame charges as against the petitioners
for the offences under Sections 206,420,120(b) of IPC.
6. Hence, this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order
passed by the Court below.
7. In the result, this Criminal Appeal appeal stands dismissed.
Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
23.02.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
aav
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl. A(MD) No. 74 of 2022
To:
1. Special Court under TANPID Act Cases, Madurai
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Economic Offence Wing-II
Madurai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl. A(MD) No. 74 of 2022
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN.J.
aav
Crl. A(MD)No.74 of 2022
23.02.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
