Madras High Court
Muthuvel Industries vs State on 30 November, 2016
Author: K.Kalyanasundaram
Bench: K.Kalyanasundaram
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 30.11.2016
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.8811 of 2011
and
M.P(MD) No. 2 of 2011
1.Muthuvel Industries,
No.20-A, Race Course Road,
Dindigul.
2.Muthuvel Finance,
No.20-A, Race Course Road,
Dindigul.
3.Muthuvel Investments,
No.20-A, Race Course Road,
Dindigul.
4.Muthuvel and Co.,
No.20-A, Race Course Road,
Dindigul.
5.Muthuvel Syndicate,
No.20-A, Race Course Road,
Dindigul.
6.Muthuvel Corporation,
No.20-A, Race Course Road,
Dindigul.
7.Muthuvel Enterprises,
No.20-A, Race Course Road,
Dindigul.
8.Muthuvel Associates,
No.20-A, Race Course Road,
Dindigul.
9.Muthuvel Services,
No.20-A, Race Course Road,
Dindigul.
10.A.Subburam
11.A.Muthuvel
12.A.Jayakumar
13.Kannammal Subburam
14.V.S.K.Chandrasekaran
15.K.Ganesan
16.M.Jothi
17.J.Geetha
18.C.Chitra
19.K.Muthulakshmi ... Petitioners/Accused 1 to 19
-Vs-
State, Represented by
The Inspector of Police,
EOW-II,
Dindigul,
Dindigul District. ... Respondent/Complainant
Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to the charge sheet in
C.C.No.3 of 2008, on the file of the Special Court for TNPID Act Madurai and
to quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.S.Natesh Raja
for M/s.B.S.G.Firm
For Respondent : Mr.K.Anbarasan
Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
:ORDER
This petition has been filed to quash the case in C.C.No.3 of 2008, on the file of the learned Special Judge under TNPID Act, Madurai.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the State.
3. It is mainly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent police has no power to investigate the case registered under the provisions of TNPID Act and it has to be done only by the Revenue Divisional Officer/Competent Authority as per Section 2(1) of TNPID Act.
4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) on instructions, would submit that the Hon'ble Supreme Court had already considered and rejected the grounds raised in the quash petition.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the personal appearance of the petitioners may be dispensed with and they further undertake that the petitioners/accused will extend their co-operation for completion of the trial within the time stipulated by this Court.
6. Perusal of the records would reveal that there are prima facie materials available against the petitioners. Hence, this Court is not inclined to quash the case in C.C.No.3 of 2008, on the file of the Special Court under TNPID Act cases, Madurai.
7. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected M.P.(MD).No.2 of 2011 is also dismissed.
8. The personal appearance of the petitioners is dispensed with and they are directed to appear before the Trial Court as and when their presence is required and they shall not dispute the identity of the witnesses. Further, the learned Special Judge under TNPID Act, Madurai, is directed to dispose of the case in C.C.No.3 of 2008, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
To:
1.Special Court for TNPID Act Cases, Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police, EOW-II, Dindigul, Dindigul District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai..