Back
2016 Supreme(Mad) 2519
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.N. PRAKASH, J.
Kavin Vivek- Petitioner
Vs.
State represented by the Inspector of Police - Respondent
Crl.O.P. Nos.30625, 30626 of 2015 and M.P. Nos.1 & 2 of 2015
Decided On : 05-08-2016
For the Appellant : Mr. I. Subramanian, Sr. Counsel for M/s. Abdul Hameed Mr. P.H. Pandian, Sr. Counsel
For the Respondent: Mr. C. Emalias Addl. Public Prosecutor Mr. A. Selvendran and Mr. R. Sankara Subbu
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Sections 173(8), 207 and 313 - Execute Non-Bailable - Bureaucrats lobby to torpedo - Seeking to quash - It is common knowledge that appointment to posts of Public Relations Officer in Department of Information and Public Relations in State Government is neither through Public Service Commission nor through Employment Exchange but direct appointment by State Government - Every political party that comes to power in State makes appointments to posts of Public Relations Officer in every district in order to do propaganda of works done by Government throughout State - Rupee non-judicial stamp paper acknowledging receipt of from victims and promised them to get the job or otherwise return the money - As time passed promised job was not got for victims and so victims started putting pressure on - Held, To whom should the re-investigation be ordered is next question that falls for consideration of this Court - Admittedly though retired now was a senior officer in rank of Secretary in Tamil Nadu bureaucracy - Even in the order in Crl O.P. which has been extracted in above this Court has observed that heavy pressure is being brought upon Inspector of Police by serving bureaucrats lobby to torpedo main case itself on account of which Investigation Officer of State Police himself appears to have filed an application under Section 173(8) Criminal Procedure Code for further investigation - Therefore it will not be advisable to hand over re-investigation of case to State Police - Criminal Original Petitions stand disposed
These Criminal Original Petitions are filed seeking to quash the final report in C.C. No.99 of 2015 on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai.
2. The facts obtaining in this case embody the anxiety of India’s educated village youth to get State employment and how their yearnings can be exploited by charlatans at high places.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to by their name.
4. A. Ganapathy, aged 60 years, is a Press Reporter and he knows D.Vivekanandan, I.A.S. (A2) and his son Kavin Vivek (A1) intimately. D.Vivekanandan, I.A.S., (A2) during 2013, was working as Project Director in Tamil Nadu State AIDS Control Society in the cadre of Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu and he was living with his son at No.26, A.B.E.A. Nagar, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai.
5. It is common knowledge that appointment to the posts of Public Relations Officer in the Department of Information and Public Relations in the State Government is neither through the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission nor through Employment Exchange, but, by direct appointment by the State Government. Every political party that comes to power in the State makes appointments to the posts of Public Relations Officer in every district in order to do propaganda of the works done by the Government throughout the State. Therefore, whichever party comes to power, there will be a scramble for appointment to these posts.
6. It is the case of Ganapathy that ten persons, viz., K.Vijayarajan, N.L.Jameema, T. Dinesh, R. Solai Ganesh, C.Vijayakumar, M. Sumathi, R.Jagannathan, K. Sudha, M.S. Aruna and M.S. Anand (hereinafter referred to as the victims) approached him for getting appointment as Public Relations Officer with the help of his contacts with the Government.
7. According to Ganapathy, he took the victims to the Thiruvanmiyur residence of D. Vivekanandan, I.A.S., (A2) where, each of the victims paid Rs 13 lakhs on 14.09.2013 to D. Vivekanandan, I.A.S. (A2) and his son Kavin Vivek (A1) and that D. Vivekanandan, I.A.S. (A2) promised to get them the job. Thus, a total sum of Rs.1.30 crores was received by D.Vivekanandan, I.A.S. (A2) and Kavin Vivek (A1) and according to Ganapathy, Kavin Vivek (A1) gave a receipt on a 20 rupee non-judicial stamp paper, acknowledging receipt of Rs.1.30 crores from the 10 victims and promised them to get the job or otherwise, return the money. As time passed, the promised job was not got for the victims and so, the victims started putting pressure on Ganapathy.
8. It is the contention of Ganapathy that on 16.12.2013, he met Kavin Vivek (A1) and at that time, Kavin Vivek (A1) told him that he would bring the money to a place near S.B.O.A. School in Anna Nagar-West around 11 a.m. on 25.12.2013. Accordingly, on 25.12.2013, around 11 a.m., Kavin Vivek (A1) came to the agreed spot and showed a suitcase that was kept in his car and told Ganapathy that it contains cash of Rs.1.30 crores and asked Ganapathy to return the original receipt. When Ganapathy handed over the original receipt, Kavin Vivek (A1) got into his car and sped away. According to Ganapathy, he had taken a photocopy of the receipt which was available with him.
9. Thereafter, Ganapathy prepared a complaint and lodged the same on 25.12.2013, along with the photocopy of the receipt, to the Inspector of Police, V-5 Thirumangalam Police Station, within whose jurisdiction, S.B.O.A. School falls. Since the Inspector of Police did not register F.I.R., Ganapathy filed Crl.O.P.No.26 of 2014 seeking a direction to the police to register F.I.R. When Crl.O.P. No.26 of 2014 came up for hearing (before C.T. Selvam, J.) on 10.01.2014, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor informed the Court that the police have registered a case based on the complaint dated 25.12.2013 given by Ganapathy in V-5 Thirumangalam P.S. Crime No.2603 of 2013 on 31.12.2013 for offences under Section 420, 406 and 506(II) IPC. Recording the said submission, Crl.O.P. No.26 of 2014
