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

2016 Supreme(Mad) 1810

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.T. SELVAM, J.
Selvaraj – Petitioners
vs.
State represented by The Inspector of Police,- Respondents
CRL.R.C.Nos.321 & 322 of 2015 and M.P.Nos.1 & 1 of 2015
Decided On : 27-06-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.Shanmughasundaram, senior counsel for Mr.H.Rajasekar
For the Respondent:Mr.C.Iyyapparaj Government Advocate [Crl.side] [R1] Mr. V. Raghavachari for Mr.Ar.M.Arunachalam [R2]

Headnote:

Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act – Indian Penal Code,1860 – Section 406, 420, 477-A r/w 120-B - Complaint was preferred by second respondent acting President of South India Cine and TV Drivers Association informing that first accused as President second accused as Secretary and third accused as Treasurer of Association wrongfully had drawn a sum of amount from Associations savings fund of about crores on the pretext of advancing monies towards purchase of land at District said advance was not evidenced by any receipt and there was no account regards registration of sale deeds of said land or plotting out thereof - Instead of allotting plots to members plots have been sold to outsiders no accounts there regards had been produced or submitted to audit and having dealt with a sum of crores a sum has been defalcated - Accounts of Association for period had not been subjected to audit - When asked for accounts accused resorted to acts of violence defamation and spreading falsehood- Held, Learned counsel for second respondent/de facto complainant submitted that no separate elections were held for welfare Society - On assumption of office as office bearers of Association persons automatically became office bearers of welfare Society - Welfare Society was a sub society of association and had been found exclusively for purpose of distributing house sites to members of Association - Learned counsel submitted that much money had found its way to personal accounts of accused from the account of Association - Monies towards purchase of lands had been drawn only from Association account - Monies collected from members of Association had also been credited to Association account - This reveals position that both Association and Society are interlinked and are being operated by same administrative body - Referring to a tabular statement learned counsel submitted that same made explicit diversion of funds to accused and third parties from two accounts of Society and two accounts of Association - Miscellaneous petitions are closed

ORDER :

Case in Crime No.1202 of 2011 on the file of the respondent was registered for offences u/s.406, 420, 477-A r/w 120-B IPC. The complaint was preferred by second respondent, the acting President of the South India Cine and TV Drivers Association, informing that the first accused as President, the second accused as Secretary and the third accused (since deceased) as Treasurer of the Association, wrongfully had drawn a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- from the Association's savings fund of about Rs.1= crores on the pretext of advancing monies towards purchase of land at Nallore Nagar, Ulundurpet Cuddalore District. The said advance was not evidenced by any receipt and there was no account regards the registration of the sale deeds of the said land or plotting out thereof. Instead of allotting plots to the members, plots have been sold to outsiders, no accounts there regards had been produced or submitted to audit and having dealt with a sum of Rs.8 = crores, a sum of Rs.3 = crores has been defalcated. The accounts of the Association for the period 2008-2010 had not been subjected to audit. When asked for accounts, the accused resorted to acts of violence, defamation and spreading falsehood. The complaint also informs of one of the accused having done away with documents using a pendrive. On completion of investigation, the final report informs that the committee comprising of 19 persons with first accused as President, second accused as Secretary and third accused (since deceased) as the treasurer, decided to allot a half ground plot free of costs to each of its members. Without obtaining the concurrence of the General Body, accused 1 to 3 withdrew a sum of Rs.11 lakhs from the account of the Association, informed of having acquired an extent of 230 acres at Nallore Nagar near Ulundurpet and without disclosing any accounts or allotting free plots to the members, collected sums of Rs.24,000/- from some of them and sold the plots to outsiders for a total sum of Rs.9= crores and enriched themselves in a sum of Rs.2,84,88,958/-. The charge sheet informed of commission of offences by eleven persons along with the deceased erstwhile treasurer. Upon conduct of audit, it was found that the accused have done away with a sum of Rs.2,84,88,938/-. The third accused has embezzled a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and the fourth accused, without consent of the Association, has sold the plots purchased by the Association to outsiders. Hence, the accused were charged for offences u/.406, 420, 477-A r/w 120-B, 380 r/w 34 IPC. Challenging the same, revision petitioners have preferred discharge petitions in Crl.M.P.Nos.2767 and 2768 of 2014 on the file of learned XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, which were dismissed under orders dated 20.02.2015. There against, the present revisions have been filed.

2. Heard Mr. R. Shanmugasundaram, learned senior counsel for petitioners and Mr. C. Iyyapparaj, learned Government Advocate [Crl.side] for first respondent and Mr. V. Raghavachari, learned counsel for second respondent.

3. It has been submitted on behalf of petitioners that the South India Cine and TV Drivers Association and South India Cine and TV Drivers Welfare Society were two distinct entities. The Society was one registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act. The Registrar of Society had found no wrong doing in the conduct of the Society. The contention of prosecution that the Society was a branch of the Association was not supported by any material. There were civil suits wherein injunction stood granted against the de facto complainant from acting in respect of the Society and hence, the de facto complainant lacked authority to file a complaint on its behalf. The Registrar of Societies had not ordered any audit of the Society. Audit had been done at the behest of the de facto complainant. The de facto complainant who was the President of the Association did not have control or domain over the accounts of the Society which continued









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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 Back to top