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

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3981

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

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr.R.Balakrishnan in Crl.OP(MD).3155/2024 Mr.S.Sankarapandian in Crl.OP(MD).5962/2024
For the Respondents:Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R.1 to R.3 in Crl.OP(MD).3155/2024 for R.1, R.7 in Crl.OP(MD).5962/2024

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.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (TNPID) Act, 1997 - Investigation of economic offences and timely justice for depositors highlighted. - Report identifies 300 victims with accumulated losses of Rs. 10 crore; properties and bank accounts of accused have been seized but delays in trial and attachment process remain a concern. (Paras 4, 10, 15, 18)

(B) Court emphasizes that the investigation agency must act promptly to protect depositors' interests and believes that delays in judicial processes undermine the objectives of the TNPID Act. (Paras 12, 21, 24)

Facts of the case:
The cases involve complaints of cheating by financial establishments that collected deposits promising high returns but defaulted on repayments, affecting numerous depositors. (Paras 4, 9)

Findings of Court:
The court necessitates expedited investigations and trial proceedings under the TNPID Act to facilitate justice for victims. (Paras 25)

Issues: Addressing delays in investigations and trials under the TNPID Act and the effectiveness of the Economic Offences Wing. (Paras 18, 22)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that prompt action by the investigation agency is essential to protect the rights of depositors under the TNPID Act, urging that systemic changes must be implemented to prevent ongoing delays. (Paras 20, 25)

Result: Instructions issued to conclude investigations and trials without further delay.

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

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