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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 1784

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.
V. Mohan Dass & Others – Appellants
Versus
The Inspector of Police, Chennai & Others – Respondents
Crl. R.C. Nos. 992, 1032 & 1040 of 2021 & 196 & 396 of 2022 & Crl. M.P. No. 4005 of 2022
Decided On : 24-05-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioners:L. Infant Dinesh, B. Kumar, Senior Counsel, S. Ramachandran, R. Karunakaran, K. Shankar, R. Rajarathinam, G. Muthukumar, For the Respondents: K. Srinivasan, Special Public Prosecutor.

The charge against A3 and A4 are groundless.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL REVISION - PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988 - SECTION 11, 120-B, 13(2) R/W. 13(1)(D) - CHARGE AGAINST ACCUSED - DISCHARGE PETITION - HELD THAT THE CHARGE AGAINST A3 AND A4 ARE GROUNDLESS. ACCORDINGLY, THE FINDING GIVEN BY THE TRIAL COURT IS HEREBY SET ASIDE IN RESPECT OF A3 AND A4 AND THEY ARE DISCHARGED FROM THE CASE IN C.C.NO.8 OF 2019.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners herein are A3, A5, A4, A1 & A2 in C.C.No.8 of 2019. During trial in C.C.No.8 of 2019, the petitioners along with A6 have filed Crl.R.C.Nos.992, 1032 & 1040 of 2021 and 196 & 396 of 2022 discharge petitions under Sections 329 and 222 of Cr.P.C., in Crl.M.P.Nos.10520 of 2019, 3284 of 2021, 129 of 2020, 2565 of 2020, 3000 of 2020 and 1540 of 2020 in C.C.No.8 of 2019. The learned Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases (VIII Additional City Civil Court), Chennai/Trial Court, vide order, dated 06.10.2021 dismissed the discharge petitions filed by A1 to A5 and allowed the discharge petition filed by A6.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the charge against A3 and A4 are groundless. Accordingly, the finding given by the Trial Court is hereby set aside in respect of A3 and A4 and they are discharged from the case in C.C.No.8 of 2019.

Issues: Whether the charge against A3 and A4 are groundless.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court observed that except for the isolated incident of A3 receiving a help by way of Rs.20,000/- accommodation while purchasing a two wheeler to his daughter and A3''s contention, that he had repaid the same within a short period and it was only an accommodation is not disputed. A2 admits the receipt of Rs.20,000/-. Likewise, A4''s son who had some arrears during his study was on a lien period, during that period for one month was employed in A2''s Consultancy. These two isolated incidents cannot be looked against A3 and A4. The order of the Lower Court in dismissing the petitions filed by A3 and A4 is without any reasoning. On the contrary, there are positive evidence from the staff and officials of EPFO stating that the file as regards M/s.CPF India Pvt. Ltd. was processed in the normal course, further the ledger account and letter is not a secret document, it can be furnished to the establishment if they ask for the same.

Final Decision: The criminal revision petitions filed by A3 and A4 in Crl.R.C.Nos.992/2021 and 1040/2021 are allowed and the criminal revision petitions filed by A1, A2 and A5 in Crl.R.C.Nos.196/2022, 396/2022 and 1032/2021 are dismissed.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer in Crl.R.C.No.992 of 2021: Criminal Revision is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to set aside the order of the lower Court in Crl.M.P.No.10520 of 2019 in C.C.No.8 of 2019 order dated on 06.10.2021 on the file of Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases (VIII Additional City Civil Court).

In Crl.R.C.No.1032 of 2021: Criminal Revision is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in C.C.No.8 of 2019 pending on the file of the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases (VIII Additional City Civil Court), Chennai and set aside the order dated 06/10/2021 passed in Crl.M.P.No.3284/2021 and discharge accused from C.C.No.08/2019. Crl.R.C.Nos.992, 1032 & 1040 of 2021 and 196 & 396 of 2022

In Crl.R.C.No.1040 of 2021: Criminal Revision is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.129 of 2020 in C.C.No.8 of 2019 by the Principal Special Judge for CBI Case, (VII Addl. City Civil Court) Chennai dt.06-10- 2021 and to allow the Revision petition.

In Crl.R.C.No.196 of 2022: Criminal Revision is filed under Section 309 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, (a)to call for the records from the lower Court (b)to discharge the petitioner/accused-1 by setting aside the order passed by learned Principal Special Judge for CBI cases, VIII Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai in Crl.M.P.No.2565 of 2020 in C.C.No.8 of 2019, dated 6.10.2021 (c)pass any orders as this Court deemed fit and proper in the circumstances listed in this petition and thus render justice.

In Crl.R.C.No.396 of 2022: Criminal Revision is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in C.C.No.8/2019 pending on the file of the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases (VIII Additional City Civil Court), Chennai and set aside the order dated 06/10/2021 passed in Crl.M.P.No.3000 of 2020 and discharge accused from C.C.No.08/2019.)

Common Order:

1. The petitioners herein are A3, A5, A4, A1 & A2 in C.C.No.8 of 2019. During trial in C.C.No.8 of 2019, the petitioners along with A6 have filed Crl.R.C.Nos.992, 1032 & 1040 of 2021 and 196 & 396 of 2022 discharge petitions under Sections 329 and 222 of Cr.P.C., in Crl.M.P.Nos.10520 of 2019, 3284 of 2021, 129 of 2020, 2565 of 2020, 3000 of 2020 and 1540 of 2020 in C.C.No.8 of 2019. The learned Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases (VIII Additional City Civil Court), Chennai/Trial Court, vide order, dated 06.10.2021 dismissed the discharge petitions filed by A1 to A5 and allowed the discharge petition filed by A6.

2. Aggrieved against the order of the Trial Court, dated 06.10.2021, the petitioners A3, A5, A4, A1 & A2 have filed the present Criminal Revision Cases.

3. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the petitioners are referred to as accused, as per their rank, in the charge sheet. Since all the revisions arise out of C.C.No.8 of 2019, this Court decides to dispose of all the petitions by way of Common Order.

4. The allegations against the accused in the charge sheet is as follows:-

(i) A1 was working as Senior Social Security Assistant, Employees Provident Fund Organization (EPFO), Regional Office, Chennai from April Crl.R.C.Nos.992, 1032 & 1040 of 2021 and 196 & 396 of 2022 2004 to 14.09.2015 and as Section Supervisor from 15.09.2015 to May 2017 and was working in Group 25. A2 is one of the Directors of M/s.SY Consultants Statutory Services Private Limited having office at "Eden Dale", New No.7, Old No.6, Ground Floor, Bishop Waller''s Avenue (E), Mylapore, Chennai. M/s.SY Consultants and Statutory Services is engaged in offering statutory services such as EPF; ESIC, etc. A3 was promoted and posted as Senior Social Security Assistant in April 2004 and as Section Supervisor in September 2015 at Regional Office, Chenna

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