For the sake of convenience, it may be necessary to briefly state the facts obtaining in each of the cases individually.

2. W.P.No.14664 of 2015 has been filed by M/s Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. [hereinafter would be referred to as Helios] for quashing the FIR in Cr.No.5 of 2015 that was registered on 01.04.2015 against the petitioner for an offence under Section 420 IPC and Section 5 of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997 [hereinafter would be referred to as TNPID Act].

3. W.P.No.14229 of 2015 has been filed by Viswapriya (India) Limited, formerly known as Viswapriya Financial Services and Securities Ltd., [hereinafter would be referred to as Viswapriya] for quashing the FIR in Cr.No.5 of 2013 that was registered on 21.10.2013 by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing, for offences under Sections 120B, 406, 420 IPC and Section 5 of the TNPID Act.

4. It is indeed a sheer coincidence that, though Helios and Viswapriya have no relationship with each other, yet, they share a common Cr.No.5, but of course registered in different years. It is the specific case of the prosecution that, Helios and Viswapriya had collected deposits from public and on maturity, they failed to repay them, pursuant to which, on the complaint lodged by depositors, the aforesaid cases were registered against them for the offence under the TNPID Act along with IPC offences. At the outset, it is contended on behalf of Helios and Viswapriya that, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing has no authority to conduct investigation under the TNPID Act and therefore, the very FIR deserves to be quashed. In support of this plea, the learned counsel for the accused submitted that, the power of Economic Offences Wing to conduct investigation for an offence under TNPID Act came for consideration before a learned single Judge of this Court in P.S.Chellamuthu v. The State Crl.O.P.Nos.21711 and 35339 of 2007 and this Court by order dated 04.12.2008, upheld the power of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing to conduct investigation by referring to Sections 4 and 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This order was taken to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No.53 of 2009 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court granted leave and passed the following order on 08.01.2010:

"Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Leave granted.

During the pendency of the appeal, operation and implementation of the impugned judgment and order shall as also further proceedings in C.C.No.31/2001 pending before the Special Court [TNPID ACT] Chennai shall remain stayed."

5. Therefore, it is the contention of the learned counsel that, since the Hon'ble Supreme Court has stayed the order dated 04.12.2008 passed by this Court in P.S.Chellamuthu's case, this Court should await the outcome of the decision of the Supreme Court. In support of this contention, the learned counsel relied upon the following judgments: