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

2024 Supreme(Online)(AP) 22919

APHC010922202018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3333]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13140/2018 Between:

Dada Pulla Rao ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S)

Others Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

1. SRINIVASULU KURRA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

1. Y L SIVAKALPANA REDDY(SC CUM SPL PP,CID)

The Court made the following:

ORDER

This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short “Cr.P.C.”) to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.9 of 2016 on the file of Special Judge for Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 cum Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ongole.

2. The petitioner herein is the accused No.7 and the 2nd respondent is the defacto complainant. The 2nd respondent has submitted a report to the Station House Officer, Chirala I Town Police Station, stating that he is the resident of Paparajuthota of Chirala town and as he has studied 10th class, he joined as an agent in Akshya Gold Real Estate and Developers Private Limited situated at Balaji Complex, Chirala. The said company has started a scheme in the name of „Own Your Land‟ and the 2nd respondent was promised to be paid 4% commission per plot and was forced to admit members in the schemes. The complainant stated that being unaware that the said schemes are illegal and against law, he has joined as an agent for livelihood and hence, requested the Police to take necessary action. Upon receiving the said letter, the Inspector of Police has registered the case in Crime No.132 of 2012 for the offences punishable under Section 320 of I.P.C., Sections 4, 5 read with 2(c) 3 of Prize Chits, Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 and Section 5 of A.P. Protection of Deposits of Financial Establishments Rules, 1999. After due investigation, the Police have filed a charge sheet vide C.C.No.9 of 2016 on the file of the Special Judge for Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 cum Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ongole wherein it was held that the accused, dishonestly and fraudulently induced the public by collecting deposits and defaulted on the promise of high returns, which attracts Section 420 of IPC. It is further stated in the charge sheet that the depositors have entrusted their hard earned money with the accused hoping that they would get their money back with higher rate of interest at the time of maturity. But, the accused have dishonestly misappropriated the deposits by diverting the funds by way of purchasing properties in their names, as such, the accused are alleged to have committed criminal breach of trust, which is an offence punishable under Section 406 IPC read with 34 IPC. As the accused failed to repay the deposits, the said act attracts Section 5 of APPDFE Act, 1999. Further, the accused are alleged to have been committed offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5 read with 2(C) of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, under Section 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 and under Section 120(B) of IPC. Seeking quashment of C.C.No.9 of 2016 on the file of Special Judge for Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 cum Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ongole the present petition is filed.

3. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the contents of the charge sheet has argued that the date on which the 2nd respondent joined as a member of the Akshya Gold Real Estate and Developers Private Limited, the petitioner herein is ceased to be a Director. The petitioner herein has joined in the said company on 03.11.2008 and subsequently became the Director of the company on 28.09.2009 and thereafter, the petitioner has retired on 08.11.2010, to prove which, learned counsel for the petitioner brought the attention of this Court to the Form 32 issued by the Registrar of Companies which confirms that the petitioner herein is not associated with the company with effect from 08.11.2010. Even at the time when the petitioner worked as the Director, he was not involved in day to day affairs or administration of the company. As the petitioner was neither the Director nor an employee of the company subsequent to 08.11.2010, implicatin

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