Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

P.M.Jayabalan vs The State Represented By on 18 March, 2022

                                                                                          Crl.O.P.No.6188 of 2022



                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED : 18.03.2022

                                                                CORAM

                            THE HONOURABLE THIRU JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN

                                                 Crl.O.P.No.6188 of 2022
                                         and Crl.M.P.Nos.3481 and 3482 of 2022

                P.M.Jayabalan                                                                     ... Petitioner

                                                                    vs

                1. The State represented by
                   Deputy Superintendent of Police,
                   Vigilance and Anti-Corruption,
                   Chennai – 28.

                2. S.M.Kuppusamy                                                            ...
                Respondents

                          Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C to call for
                the      records    in   Spl.C.C.No.2 of 2013 on the file                 of Chief      Judicial
                Magistrate/Special Judge at Chengalpet and quash the same.


                                  For Petitioner                :        Ms.R,Thenmozhi

                                  For 1st Respondent            :        Mr.E.Raj Thilak
                                                                         Addl.Public Prosecutor

                                                       ORDER

This petition is filed to quash the proceedings pending in Spl.C.C.No.2 of 2013 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Special Judge 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.6188 of 2022 at Chengalpet.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner used to sign and forward the “Note file” sent by the Secretary of the Society on the decision taken by the concerned authority, without verification and in discharging the above duties, the petitioner has no criminal intention on his part in signing the note.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that case was registered in the year 2013. The petitioner had already filed Discharge Petition in Crl.O.P.No.422 of 2016 and the same was dismissed on 08.09.2021, against which, the petitioner had preferred revision in Crl.R.C.No.749 of 2021 and the same was dismissed as withdrawn.

4. Heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.

5. It is seen from the final report that during the period between 1999 and 2004, A.1 to A.12 at Kanchipuram, Chennai and other places, having agreed among themselves to commit and to abet one another in the commission of the acts in connection with the purchase of the lands situated at Karai, Vedal, Semanthangal and Enathur villages in 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.6188 of 2022 Kancheepuram Taluk for Kancheepuram Co-operative Housing Society from the private individuals viz., A.7 to A.10 for the purpose of laying out of housing plots to its members at a rate far and above the guideline value/market value and after manipulating/creating false market value certificates signed and issued by A.5, boosting the value of the lands and dishonestly and fraudulently to use the same as genuine, to frame incorrect documents and to process the files and also to execute the developmental works such as levelling of lands, laying of roads and construction of culvert and arch by abusing their official position with a view to obtain pecuniary advantage to themselves and thereby causing wrongful loss to the said Society and to cheat and misappropriate the funds of the Society and committed misconduct and thus A.1 to A.12 have committed offences punishable under sections 120-B r/w 409, 420 r/w 471 and 109 IPC and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 r/w 109 IPC.

6. The specific allegation against the petitioner is that during the said period between 09.09.1999 and 2000, at the instigation of A.3, A.12 had put up a note ante-dating it on 09.09.1999 misrepresenting the facts that permission was granted for the revised estimate for incurring an expenditure of Rs.28,00,000/- for carrying out the developmental works such as levelling of the land, formation of roads, construction of culverts 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.6188 of 2022 etc., which was approved by A.3 and A.11 knowing it to be false since the approval for the first estimate for Rs.23.5 lakhs was given only on 03.11.1999 and thus quotations were called and considered and then permitted developmental works to be carried on even prior to the approval of the revised estimate by the contractor who executed lesser amount of work than the actual measurement recorded in the M-Books. A.1, by abusing his official position, intentionally omitted to verify the relevant records while he was considering the revised estimate for approving and recommending the same to A.1, who had accorded his approval and thereby caused wrongful loss to the Kancheepuram Cooperative Society to the tune of Rs.4,48,529.95 and thus, A.3 and A.11 committed offences of cheating and criminal misconduct punishable under Sections 420 IPC and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. A.1 has committed the offence punishable under Sections 109 IPC r/w 420 IPC r/w 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

7. Supporting these charges, the prosecution has furnished materials and on considering the materials, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that charges have been framed against this petitioner and the other accused.

4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.6188 of 2022

8. In view of the framing of charges against the petitioner and the other accused on the basis of prima facie materials available for the aforesaid offences, this Court is not inclined to entertain the petition to quash the proceedings.

8. Accordingly, Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

18.03.2022 sr Index:no speaking order/non-speaking order To

1. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Chennai – 28.

2. The Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Chennai.

3. The Additional Public Prosecutor,High Court, Madras G.CHANDRASEKHARAN,J., sr 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.6188 of 2022 Crl.O.P.No.6188 of 2022 18.03.2022 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis