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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 2985

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
Gunasekaran - Appellant
Versus
The State Rep., by Inspector of Police, Thiruvannamalai - Respondent
Crl.R.C. No. 437 of 2015
Decided On : 11-07-2022

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:D. Rajagopal, Advocate. For the Respondent:N.S. Suganthan, Government Advocate, (Crl.Side).

Headnote:

Criminal Revision Petition - Misappropriation of Funds - Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, Section 81 - IPC Sections 408 and 477-A - The court discussed the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, Section 81, and IPC Sections 408 and 477-A. It emphasized the requirement of entrustment and dominion over the property for the offence under Section 408 IPC and the need to prove alteration, mutilation, destruction, or falsification of records for the offence under Section 477-A IPC. The court found that the guilt of the accused was not proved beyond doubt and set aside the judgment.

Fact of the Case:

Mr. Gunasekaran, a former Secretary of a Co-operative Society, was accused of misappropriating funds. He was convicted by the Trial Court and the conviction was confirmed by the Appellate Court. The revision petition challenged the correctness and legality of the Appellate Court judgment.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the guilt of the petitioner/accused was not proved beyond doubt. It emphasized the lack of conclusive proof for the alleged misappropriation and falsification of accounts. The judgment of the Appellate Court was set aside, and the fine amount paid was ordered to be refunded to the petitioner.

Issues: The issues revolved around the alleged misappropriation of funds and falsification of accounts by the former Secretary of the Co-operative Society. The prosecution failed to produce conclusive evidence, and the Court emphasized the lack of proof for the alleged offences.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the requirement of entrustment and dominion over the property for the offence under Section 408 IPC and the need to prove alteration, mutilation, destruction, or falsification of records for the offence under Section 477-A IPC. It found that the guilt of the accused was not proved beyond doubt.

Final Decision: The Criminal Revision Petition was allowed, and the judgment of the Appellate Court was set aside. The fine amount paid, if any, was ordered to be refunded to the petitioner, and the bail bond executed was discharged.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 read with 401 of Cr.P.C., to call for the entire records of the judgement rendered by the Learned 1st Additional District Sessions Judge, Vellore in C.A.No.9 of 2010 dated 05.03.2015 in C.C.No.1 of 2009, Judicial Magistrate-II, Vellore and set aside the same.)

1.Mr.Gunasekaran - the Revision Petitioner herein served as Secretary in Melpallipattu Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society from 09/06/1988 to 13/02/2002. Mr.Rajendra Prasad, Deputy Registrar of Thiruvannamalai Cooperative Societies issued proceedings dated 29/02/2008 under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act appointing Mr.Ramalingam, the Field Officer to conduct enquiry regarding irregularities in Melpallipattu Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society. On completion of enquiry, said Ramalingam submitted his report dated 05/06/2008. His report concluded, “Mr.Gunasekaran while serving as the Secretary of the said Society was in charge of maintaining daily accounts, documents of the Society and responsible to supervise the employees and protect the Society interest. He misusing the trust, falsified accounts, forged signatures of the deposit holders and misappropriated a sum of Rs.2,94,202.80”. The enquiry report, under 5 different heads classified the act of crime committed by the then Secretary of the Society.

2. A complaint along with the enquiry report was forwarded to the Superintendent of Police, C.C.I.W-C.I.D to take necessary action. On receipt of the complaint, F.I.R in Crime No.5/2008 under Sections 408 and 477-A of I.P.C was registered and taken up for investigation.

3. On completion of investigation, 3 final Reports were filed against Gunasekaran and same taken on file by the Judicial Magistrate-II, Vellore and numbered as C.C.No.1/2009, C.C.No.2/2009 and C.C.No.3/2009.

4. In C.C.No.01/2009 the charges against Gunasekaran was for the offences under sections 408 I.P.C and 477(A) I.P.C in connection with withdrawal of Rs.25,000/- and Rs.16,000/- as loan from the Fixed Deposits made by Kamatchi and Divya respectively, without their knowledge and consent. Falsifying the records and forging valuable security.

5. The Trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused to undergo six months R.I and to pay fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo S.I for three months for each offence and ordered that the sentences shall run concurrently.

6. Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the appeal before the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vellore was filed in C.A.No.09/2010 and same was dismissed on 05/03/2015.

7. In this revision petition, the specific ground challenging the correctness and legality of the Appellate Court judgment in C.A.No.9/2010 confirming the judgment in C.C.No.1/2009 are:-

On the date of suspension (13/02/2002) as per the instruction of the Special Officer, he handed over the charge to one Kuppusamy ( DW-1). On that day there was no charge against him nor any complaint of misappropriation of the Fixed Deposit money of Kamachi (PW-2). Neither PW-2 in his deposition stated that his fixed deposit money was misappropriated. He has positively stated that he made a fixed deposit of Rs.40,000/- in the society and on maturity after 5 years he got back the money with principal and interest. He was told during the enquiry by the Co-operative Society Department Officer that Rs.25,000/- was withdrawn from his FD as loan. He was not shown any document during the said enquiry except his FD receipts. He does not know to read or write. During the enquiry he was asked to sign in Ex.P-4 and he is not aware what is written in Ex.P-4.

8. The prosecution failed to produce the vouchers and connected documents in relation to the alleged misappropriation of funds and falsification of accounts. Further, the misappropriation alleged to have taken place on 18/12/1997 as per the entry in the day book. If so, the President who has counter signed the said entry in the day book is al

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 Back to top