RAJATHI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS A4 and A6 in C.C. No. 13 of 1998 on the file of the Special Judge under the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act, 1997, Chennai, have preferred the revision aggrieved against the orders passed in Crl. M.P. No. 2 of 1999 dated March 1, 1999.

(2.) THE case in brief is as follows : THE petitioners filed a petition under section 239 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, to discharge them from the case. Act No. 44 of 1997 came into force with effect from August 7, 1997. THE period of commission of offence alleged in the final report is prior to July 29, 1993, and lasted up to December 16, 1996. THEre cannot be any retrospective effect to the penal law and as such Act No. 44 of 1997 is not applicable to the case of the petitioners. Offences under section 120B read with sections 420 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code, could be tried by ordinary criminal courts, while so, trial of such offences by the Special Court will cause prejudice to the accused as if they are aggrieved by the outcome of the trial, they have to go in appeal only to the High Court thereby they will be deprived of a chance of going in appeal to the Sessions Court. Persons who are responsible for the management of the affairs of the financial establishment alone can be proceeded against under section 5 of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act and these petitioners have disassociated themselves from the firm long back by their retirements and they are not partners during the relevant period.

(3.) ARTICLE 20(1) reads as follows :