Madras High Court
Muthoot Finance Ltd vs State Through The Inspector Of ... on 2 March, 2022
Crl.R.C.(MD)No. 605 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.R.C.(MD)No. 605 of 2020
Muthoot Finance Ltd.,
Bodinayakkanur Branch – II,
Rep. by its Branch Manager,
Mrs.Prema Devi,
First Floor, G.R. Complex,
B.H.Road, Bus Stand North Gate,
Bodinayakkanur,
Theni District – 625 513. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. State through the Inspector of Police,
Commercial Crime Investigation Wing,
Theni, Theni District.
2. M.D.Special 188, Ramakrishnapuram,
Primay Agricultural Co-operative Society,
Represented by its Secretary (incharge),
R.Prabakaran ... Respondents
* R2 Impleaded as per order of this Court dated 11.12.2020
Prayer: This Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401
Cr.P.C. to set aside the orders passed in Cr.M.P.No.2255 of 2019 in C.C.No.130
of 2008 in Cr.No.3 of 2006, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. III,
(CCIW), Madurai, dated 31.07.2020.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.(MD)No. 605 of 2020
For Petitioner : Mr.K.R.Laxman
For Respondents : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the impugned
order passed in Cr.M.P.No.2255 of 2019 in C.C.No.130 of 2008 in Cr.No.3 of
2006, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. III, (CCIW), Madurai, dated
31.07.2020, thereby, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner for return of
jewels under Section 451 Cr.P.C.
2.On the complaint lodged by the second respondent, the first respondent
registered a case in Crime No. 3 of 2006, for the offences punishable under
Sections 120(b), 408, 468, 477(A) r/w 34IPC, as against the four accused
persons, alleging that the accused persons have taken the jewels from the
second respondent's safety locker, during different set of period and pledged the
same, with the petitioner herein. In pursuant to the registration of the Crime, the
entire jewels were seized from the petitioner and after completion of
investigation, in all the crime numbers, the first respondent filed a final report
and the same has been taken cognizance and the trial is pending before the trial
Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3.The petitioner is a Non-banking financial institution. While entertaining
Crl.R.C.(MD)No. 605 of 2020
jewels for pledging and lending jewel loans, the quality of jewel, identity of the
borrower and other factors are dealt by the petitioner. While being so, the
accused persons have pledged the jewels, after producing valid identity to show
their identity and address proof, such as Family Card, Voters ID and availed
loan, on pledging the jewels. While pending trial, the petitioner filed a petition
for return of jewels, under Section 451 Cr.P.C. and all the petitions were
dismissed by the learned Magistrate, on the ground that if at all, the general
public intended to redeem their jewels from the second respondent/complainant,
there is no possibility for return their jewels, if the jewels given for interim
custody to the petitioner.
4.Though notice served to the second respondent, no one represented on
behalf of the second respondent.
5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that all the
jewels were pledged by the general public, in favour of the second respondent
and availed loan, in turn, the accused persons had stolen the jewels from the
safety locker of the second respondent and pledged with the petitioner. On
registration of FIR, entire jewels were recovered from the petitioner and
deposited in the case. After completion of investigation, filed final report and
the same has been taken cognizance and trial is pending before the trial Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.(MD)No. 605 of 2020
Similarly placed matters were already ordered by this Court in Crl.O.P(MD)No.
1420 of 2016 on 21.04.2016 as follows:
“9. In the considered opinion of this Court, the existence of
corpus delicti may provide a surer foundation for the
prosecution case, but the absence of it, can in no way destroy
the prosecution assertion, if the prosecution is able to prove
the ingredients of Sections 406 and 420 IPC by adducing
proper evidence. From the perusal of the case diary, it is seen
that the Police have recorded the statement of the Branch
Manager of Muthoot Finance, Kovilpatti Branch, who is
going to speak about the pledge of jewels and other details
from the records and in the considered opinion of this Court, it
is not necessary for the Police to seize the jewels in the
present facts and circumstances of the case. However, the
Branch Manager, Muthoot Finance is directed to produce and
submit the jewels before the learned Judicial Magistrate
No.II, Kovilpatti at the time of giving evidence and the learned
Magistrate shall accept the jewels and pass appropriate
orders either under Section 451 Cr.P.C. for interim custody or
retain the same and pass appropriate orders under Section
452 Cr.P.C. at the time of final judgment. Muthoot Finance
shall not bring the jewels to auction until the dispute is finally
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
decided in the prosecution in Crime No.460 of 2013. After the
Crl.R.C.(MD)No. 605 of 2020
Manager, Muthoot Finance is examined, Meera (the defacto
complainant) can be examined or may be recalled and
examined under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for identifying the jewels.
This is left to the sound discretion of the Trial Court”
6.In view of the above, the impugned order in Cr.M.P.No.2255 of 2019 in
C.C.No.130 of 2008 in Cr.No.3 of 2006, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate
No. III, (CCIW), Madurai, dated 31.07.2020 is set aside and this Criminal
Revision Petition is allowed.
7.The learned Judicial Magistrate No. III, (CCIW), Madurai is directed to
return the jewels, in favour of the petitioner with the following conditions:
● that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-
(Rupees Ten Lakhs only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the
satisfaction of the concerned Court;
● that the seized items should be photographed at the cost of the petitioner
herein and a list is to be prepared and the same is to be signed by the
petitioner;
● that the petitioner shall not bring the jewels to auction, till the disposal
of trial;
● that the petitioner shall produce the jewels before the trial Court as and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
when required;
Crl.R.C.(MD)No. 605 of 2020
● If any of the conditions are violated, this order automatically stands
cancelled.
02.03.2022
Index :Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
PNM
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web
copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the
copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility
of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate No. III, (CCIW),
Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Commercial Crime Investigation Wing,
Theni, Theni District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.(MD)No. 605 of 2020
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.
PNM
ORDER IN
Crl.R.C.(MD)No. 605 of 2020
02.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
