SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1971 Supreme(Mad) 96

K.N.MUDALIYAR


Advocates:
C.E. Padmanabhan for M/s. Short and Bewes and Godwin Deson, for Petitioner.
The Additional Public Prosecutor, for State.

Order.-

These proceedings were initiated on a complaint filed by one Chelliah of T.A.S. Rathnam Brothers. The averment found in the complaint is that the accountant of T.A.S. Rathnam Brothers, V. Veerappan, the petitioner, has embezzled their business funds for over several thousands of rupees and that the correct amount is being investigated into and that he should make good any loss that may be determined on account of his handling cash and cheques belonging to the firm. The further allegation is that he has embezzled to the tune of about Rs. 20,000. It is casually stated that the exact embezzlement of amount will be intimated immediately after the final audit is over. The objection raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the indictment against the petitioner is that he has misappropriated the funds of the firm to the tune of about three lakhs of rupees by resorting to the modus operandi of falsifying the accounts by forging the signatures of the partners of the firm in the cheques and, therefore, the learned Counsel argued that in the present case where predominantly the offences alleged against the petitioner are non-cognizable, investigation conducted by the I





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top