Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 15512
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI, J
R.VASU – Appellant
Versus
SALEM CENTRAL ROTARY CLUB – Respondent
Organizations registered under different laws do not require duplicative registration under state societies' laws, and initiation of prosecution requires prior sanction from the Inspector General.
Headnote:
Registration - Societies - Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act - Section 4(4), Section 52 - The court interpreted provisions exempting societies registered under other laws from the requirement of registering under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act. The decision emphasized the role of the Inspector General of Registration in initiating prosecution.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, President of a club registered under a separate law, contested cognizance taken by a Magistrate for non-registration under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act based on a complaint that alleged loss to the exchequer due to failure to register multiple clubs as required by law.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the organization was exempt from registering under the Societies Act due to existing registrations under other laws and ruled that the magistrate lacked jurisdiction to entertain the complaint based on non-registration.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was required to register under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act given its existing registrations and the jurisdiction of the magistrate to entertain complaints regarding such non-registration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that societies registered under different laws are not required to register under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act as per Section 4(4) and that prosecution under the Act cannot proceed without prior sanction from the Inspector General.
Final Decision: The criminal revision petitions were allowed, setting aside the Magistrate's order taking cognizance.
COMMON ORDER
The cognizance of the alleged offence taken by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, culminating in the case in C.C. No.113/2023 by order dated 27.01.2023 in Crl. M.P. No.1973/2022 is put in issue before this Court by filing the present revision petitions.
2. The facts leading to the filing of the present revision petitions, in a nutshell, are as under :-
The petitioner is the President of the society under the name and style of Salem Central Rotary Club, a registered society as per the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 (for short ‘the Act’). It is the case of the complainant in the petition filed u/s 200 Cr.P.C. that the accused persons 2 to 26, as shown in the complaint are the members and administrators of various Rotary Clubs within the District of Salem and the said clubs are unregistered. In this regard, the defacto complainant addressed the Deputy Registrar to call upon the said clubs to register themselves under the act for which no action had been taken by the District Registrar and, hence the present private complaint was filed by the complainant.
3. Based on the said complaint, the court below ordered for enquiry u/s202 Cr.P.C. and in the absence of the report of the Station House Officer, inspite of repeated adjournments, after hearing the complainant, who appeared as party-in-person and after perusal of the records, found that the accused 2 to 26 were not registered under the Act and further inspite of the directions of the 1st respondent therein calling upon the respondents 2 to 26 therein to pay as the said societies were running for more than 45 years without registration and as no action had been taken to collect the fine and no steps also having not been taken by the 1st respondent therein on the complaint given by the complainant, held that a prima facie case had been made out for taking cognizance against the respondents therein and, accordingly, took cognizance against the 1st and 2nd respondents therein u/s 119, 166 and 166A of IPC and u/s 420 IPC against respondents 5 to 26 therein. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision has been preferred by the respective petitioners.
4. Learned senior counsel, leading the arguments on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the allegations raised by the complainant are false and fabricated as the registration of the complainant association is “Salem Central Rotary Club” while that of the petitioner is “Rotary Club of Salem Central”. It is therefore the submission of the learned counsel that without even looking into the name, the private complaint has been filed which is only in vested interest.
5. It is the further submission of the learned senior counsel that international organisations need not register their branches under the local law and the petitioner being a branch of a global continent organisation, it need not be registered, however, without appreciating the above, the court below has erroneously took cognizance of the complaint, which deserves to be quashed.
6. It is the further submission of the learned senior counsel that the petitioner and the other accused persons had not committed any fraud or cheating activities u/s 420 IPC and that the action of fraud is committed only by the complainant, who had misused and registered the name of Rotary, which is an International Trade Mark and Copyrights Organization, which was misused by the complainant.
7. It is the further submission of the learned senior counsel that the petitioner’s club is already chartered by the Rotary International on 29.09.1982 and is functioning all these days and is in fact carrying on charitable activities by registering its activities under the Trust Act which registration is as early as on 21.05.2007, with the District Registrar, Salem West, Salem District. It is therefore the submission of the learned senior counsel that as the parent entity is already registered and the charitable acts of the petitioner Association is also registered under the Trust Ac
