BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
A. Paramasivam - Petitioner
Versus
The Inspector of Police - Respondents
Crl.OP(MD)Nos. 3155, 5962 of 2024
Decided On : 16-05-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. victims' petitions for expedited justice. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. status of investigation and trial delays. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's review of submissions. (Para 7) |
| 4. tnpid act's objectives and challenges. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. cumbersome process of asset attachment. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. suggestions for improving investigation efficiency. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 7. expectation for governmental response. (Para 24) |
| 8. concluding directions for investigations. (Para 25) |
COMMON ORDER
The petitioner in Crl.OP(MD)No.3155 of 2024 is one of the victims in Crime No.2 of 2020 on the file of the Economic Offence Wing, Dindigul and he has filed this petition seeking a direction for expediting the investigation and to file the final report within a stipulated time limit.
2.The petitioner in Crl.OP(MD)No.5962 of 2024 is one of the victims and the defacto complainant in Crime No.3 of 2013 on the file of the Economic Offence Wing, Madurai. The case is now pending at the stage of trial in C.CNo.6 of 2016 before the TNPID Court, Madurai. He has filed this petition seeking a direction to conclude the trial within a stipulated time limit.
3.Though both the cases pertain to different crime numbers, considering the fact that the issue in both the petitions pertain to TNPID Act, both are heard together and are disposed of by this common order.
4.These are cases of cheating. The accused company [M/s.Udhayam Chits Private Ltd., and other sister concerns in Crl.OP(MD).3155 of 2024; M/s.PG Marketing and Agro Tech Company Ltd., and other sister concerns in Crl.OP(MD).5962 of 2024] had collected deposits from a large number of persons to fund its business operations. The company offered that they would return the matured amount with huge interest. But, they have cheated the depositors. Hence, the cases were registered.
5.Crl.OP(MD).3155/2024 -
Response of the investigation agency:-
5.1.The case was originally registered in Cr.No.2 of 2020 on the file of the Economic Offence Wing, Dindigul. Separate Economic Offence Wing was opened at Theni in the year 2022 and as per the order of the Additional Director General of Police, Economic Offence Wing, Chennai, dated 11.05.2022, the case was transferred to the Economic Offence Wing, Theni and the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Economic Offence Wing, Ramanathapuram Range, has taken up the investigation.
5.2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Economic Offence Wing, Ramanathapuram, has filed a status report that there are more than 300 victims in this case and the accused persons have cheated to the tune of Rs. 10 Crore. There are 13 accused in this case.
5.3.Five movable properties and eight immovable properties of the accused have been identified. Bank accounts of the accused valuing Rs. 29,96,075/- has been freezed and properties worth about Rs.2,20,65,017/- has been seized. For the seized properties, they are awaiting for the valuation report.
5.4.The investigation is in the right track and that they would complete the same as early as possible and file the final report.
6.Crl.OP(MD).5962/2024 -
6.1.The criminal case was originally registered in Crime No.3 of 2013. After the investigation, the case has been charge sheeted and pending in CC.No.6 of 2016 before the TNPID Court, Madurai. Considering the fact that the case is pending at the stage of trial for the past eight years, this Court has called for a report from the learned Judge.
6.2.The learned Judge, Special Court for TNPID Act Cases, Madurai, has filed a report that the properties of the accused have not been identified by the investigation agency as required u/s.3 of the TNPID Act and therefore, the trial Court is not in a position to conduct the trial further.
Response of the investigation agency:-
6.3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Economic Offence Wing, Madurai, has filed a status report that the accused had filed various discharge petitions and therefore, the trial could not commence even though the charge sheet
Thiru Muruga Finance and Others v. State Of Tamil Nadu
The court emphasizes the necessity of timely investigations and trials under the TNPID Act to safeguard the interests of depositors and prevent delays in justice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of proper adjudication before raising attachments under the TNPID Act and the need for expeditious disposal of cases to protect the ....
Financial establishments -where the assets available for attachment of a Financial Establishment or other person referred to in Section 3 are found to be less than the amount or value which such Fina....
Further investigation permitted post-charge sheet; PT warrant mandatory for custodial interrogation after arrest; trial court cannot deny post-permission.
The court reinforced that purchasers must verify pending litigations before purchasing properties, especially those under attachment due to fraudulent implications.
The accused were acquitted after settling all dues to depositors, establishing that offences under the TNPID Act can be compounded post-settlement.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.