Madras High Court
T.Ravi Kumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu
Author: N.Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N.Anand Venkatesh
1
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras
Reserved on : Delivered on :
10.08.2023 14.08.2023
Coram :
The Honourable Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESH
Criminal Original Petition No.31886 of 2022
& Crl.MP.No.19590 of 2022
1.T.Ravi Kumar, 54 years
President
All India SC/ST Association of IOB Employees
No.194/256, 1st Floor, Anna Salai
Thousand Lights, Chennai 600 006.
2.Arul Mani Arasu, 53 years
General Secretary
All India SC/ST Association of IOB Employees
No.194/256, 1st Floor, Anna Salai
Thousand Lights, Chennai 600 006.
3.Lakshmi Narayanan, 33 years
Treasurer
All India SC/ST Association of IOB Employees
No.194/256, 1st Floor, Anna Salai
Thousand Lights
Chennai 600 006. ..Petitioners
-Vs-
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep.by the Inspector of Police
Central Crime Branch-I, EDF-1, Team-II
Vepery, Chennai.
2.B.Arun
S/o.K.Balakrishnan ..Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2
PRAYER: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records of the First
Information Report registered by the 1st respondent police as Crime
No.177, dated 27.8.2022 for offences under Sections 409, 420 and 120B
of IPC, and quash the same, award costs.
For Petitioners : Mr.V.Prakash
Senior Counsel
for Mr.K.Krishnamoorthy
For Respondents: Mr.A.Gopinath
Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1
Mr.A.J.Mohamed Kassim for R2
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR registered in Crime No.177 of 2022, pending before the 1st respondent Police. The 2nd respondent filed an application before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate dealing with CCB & CBCIE cases Egmore, Chennai, u/s 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. This application was filed on the ground that the petitioners, who are the President, General Secretary and the Treasurer of the Association were involved in misappropriation of funds belonging to the Association to the tune of Rs.60,00,000/- and this misappropriation and embezzlement of funds was done during the period between 2019 to 2021.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3
2.The Jurisdictional Magistrate passed an order in Crl.MP.No. 10463 of 2023, dated 06/07/2022 directing the police to register the FIR and to investigate the matter and to file a final report, after being satisfied that a prima facie case has been made out and it reveals commission of cognizable offence.
3.Pursuant to the above order, the 1st Respondent registered an FIR in Crime No.177 of 2022 on 27/08/2022 against the petitioners for offences u/s. 409, 420 and 120(B) of IPC. The same has been put to challenge in this criminal original petition.
4.Heard Mr.V.Prakash, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, Mr.A. Gopinath, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for R1 and Mr.A.J.Mohamed Kassim, learned counsel for R2.
5.The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the entire complaint is attended with malafides since the 2nd respondent is a disgruntled person, who was removed as an office bearer on 01.10.2021 and he had an axe to grind against the petitioners. It was further submitted that the amount that was spent by the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4 Association has been properly accounted and it has also been audited and it was placed before the General Body Meeting held on March 2021 and it was approved. The 2nd respondent also participated in the General Body Meeting and signed by giving his approval for the minutes that were passed in the Meeting which also included the approval of audited balance sheet as on 31/03/2020 and 31/03/2021. Therefore, it was contented that there is no question of misappropriation of funds as claimed by the 2nd respondent. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the petitioner had given two earlier complaints before the Police and the same was enquired and it was closed and based on the same allegations, an application was filed before the learned Magistrate, which resulted in the registration of FIR. It was also contented that the petitioners have no locus standi to give the Complaint since he has been removed from his position as an office bearer on 01.10.2021 itself.
6.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent submitted that the investigation reveals that for the period from 2019 to 2021, a sum of Rs.85,05,986/- was withdrawn and the same has not been properly accounted. He further submitted that the investigation is almost complete and that a final report https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5 will be filed within the time frame fixed by this Court.
7.The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submitted that more than Rs.70,00,000/- was spent and most of the amount was spent during the Corona period in the year 2020, when there was absolutely no activity. Out of the same, the petitioners were able to account only for a sum of Rs.40,00,000/-. Insofar as the participation in meeting is concerned, the signature was subscribed by the 2nd respondent only for attending the meeting and the resolution passed did not have the support of the members and there was a lot of confusion and chaos, which resulted in ending up the meeting abruptly.
8.This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and the materials available on record.
9.There are disputed facts and this Court exercising its jurisdiction u/s. 482 of Cr.P.C, cannot undertake a mini investigation. The Apex Court judgment in M/s.Neeharika Infrastructure Private Limited v. State of Maharashtra reported in 2021 2 MWN Crl 90 has given the parameters while considering a petition filed for quashing the FIR. To a https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6 great extent, the interference into an FIR on disputed questions of facts has almost been curbed. The Apex Court has made it clear that the police must be allowed to undertake the investigation in a Complaint which makes out a cognizable offence and come to a final conclusion.
10.In the instant case, it involves misappropriation of funds belonging to the Association. The submissions made on either side clearly reveals that there are disputed questions of facts and it will be safe to leave it to the Investigation Officer to consider all the materials and come to a final conclusion. This Court on going through the records found that there are prima facie materials and this Court does not want to express any opinion on that since it will influence the investigation. This is not a fit case where this Court will exercise its jurisdiction u/s. 482 of Cr.P.C, and interfere with the investigation. In the light of the above discussion, there shall be direction to the 1st respondent to complete the investigation and to file a final or a closure report, as the case may be, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Any observations made in this order shall not have any bearing on the investigation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7
11.This Criminal Original Petition is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
14.08.2023 KP Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No To
1.The Inspector of Police Central Crime Branch-I, EDF-1, Team-II Vepery, Chennai.
2.Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 8 N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
KP Criminal Original Petition No.31886 of 2022 & Crl.MP.No.19590 of 2022 14.08.2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis