Advocates:
['M/S S N ARUNKUMAR', '', 'A P SATHYAMURTHY', 'M/S A RAJESH KANNA']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04 .04.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

Crl.O.P.No.4429 of 2019

Shivanandhan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.State by Inspector of Police,

Central Crime Branch,

Coimbatore

2.The Manager,

Federal Bank,

Coimbatore Main Branch,

Variety Hall Road,

Coimbatore

3.K.Manickam

...Respondents

(3^rd respondent is impleaded as per the order of this Court dated

15.03.2019 made in Crl.M.P.No.3932 of 2019 in Crl.O.P.No.4429 of

2019.

PRAYER:

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482

Cr.P.C. praying to direct the second respondent through 1^st

respondent to defreeze the current account No.10920200042866,

Federal Bank, Coimbatore Main Branch, pending in Crime No.52 of

2018 on the file of 1^st respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.Chandrasekar

for Mr.S.N.Arunkumar

For Respondents : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz,

Additional Public Prosecutor

For R1

: Mr.A.Rajeshkanna for R3

ORDER

This petition has been filed for direction directing the

second respondent through the first respondent to defreeze the

current Account No.10920200042866, Federal Bank, Coimbatore Main

Branch pending investigation in Crime No.52 of 2018 on the file

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

of the first respondent.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

as against the petitioner, the first respondent registered a

case in Crime No.52 of 2018 for the offences punishable under

Sections 406, 468, 471 and 506(i) I.P.C. He further submitted

that the petitioner approached this Court for anticipatory bail

and he was granted anticipatory bail on condition that the

petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.5 lakhs to the credit of

Crime No.52 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent.

Accordingly, he complied with the condition and other conditions

imposed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.28876 of 2018 were also duly

complied with. While being so, on the request of the first

respondent, the second respondent freezed the current account

No.10920200042866 on 05.02.2019 without issuing any notice to

the petitioner. Further he submitted that even after freezing

the account, the same was not intimated to the Judicial

Magistrate concerned. The first respondent also violated the

procedure contemplated under Section 102 Cr.P.C. and therefore

prayed for allowing this petition. He further cited the

following judgments:

(i) In the case of Padmini Vs. The Inspector of Police,

District Crime Branch, Tirunelveli and others reported in 2008

(3) CTC 657.

(ii) In the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Tapas

D.Neogy reported in 1999 (3) CTC 350 and

(iii) In the case of R.Chandrasekar Vs. Inspector of

Police, Fair Land Police Station, Salem and another reported in

2002(5) CTC 598.

3. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor

submitted that the petitioner is the accused and on the request

of the first respondent dated 05.02.2019, the account of the

petitioner was freezed. He further submitted that the same was

duly informed to the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III,

Coimbatore as contemplated under Section 102 Cr.P.C. Therefore,

he sought for dismissal of this petition as devoid of merits.

4. The learned counsel for the third respondent submitted

that the petitioner refused to settle the award amount and as

such he lodged complaint. In the anticipatory bail, though he

deposited Rs.5 lakhs, there is a payment due more than Rs.20

lakhs. Therefore, on the request of the first respondent, the

second respondent rightly freezed the account and duly informed

to the petitioner and the jurisdictional Magistrate concerned.

Therefore, he prayed for dismissal of this petition.

5. Heard, the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent

and the learned counsel for the third respondent.

ht