(1.) These two Criminal Original Petitions filed under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C to quash the criminal complaint against these petitioners pending on the file of Learned Judicial Magistrate III, Coimbatore, for alleged offences under Ss. 120(B), 465, 468, 471, 420 and 109 I.P.C.
(2.) The substance of the final reports dtd. 16/4/2002 and 25/6/2002 is that, during the period between February 2001 and January 2002, the first accused Arun Chinnasamy @ Chinnusami with an intention to cheat the public along with other accused persons conspired and floated a company by name "M/s.ATM Infotech". To impress upon the public, created fake Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), as if, ATM Infotech have a MoU with a Company at Paris under the name, 'Brain Data System' for Data processing. In the said MoU, the 2 nd accused Senthil @ Senthil Kumaran had affixed his signature as witness to the execution of the MoU by the first accused on behalf of 'ATM Infotech' and one Paul Susan, on behalf of 'Brain Data System', knowing fully well that there is no Company at Paris in the name 'Brain Data System' and the person Paul Susan is an fictitious person. Attractive advertisements were made in Dailies and other mode of offering moonshine in short period for the Franchisee, who invest in their scheme called Data Processing. Nearly 2500 persons invested about Rs.16.00 crores with the ATM Infotech. The money so collected were deposited in the Accounts opened at REPCO Bank by the first accused in his name, his relatives name and in fictitious names like Senthamizhan and Ponnathal, in connivance with the Manager of REPCO Bank, Ramu @ Ramasamy - the third accused. Initially, the fraud came to light on the Complaint by one Thiru.Balu alleging cheating and offence under Prize Chits and Money circulation Scheme (Banning) Act. Later, the suo motu complaint registered at Singanallur Police Station in Crime No.39 of 2002. Both the complaints were taken up for investigation. On completion of the investigation, for both the complaints, common Final Report filed 16/04/2002 and on further investigation, additional Final Report on 25/06/2002 were filed.
(3.) The petitioners, who are the 2 nd and 3 rd accused filed petitions to discharge claiming that they are innocent. The 2 nd accused, who is the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.5510/2019 contented that, he is not the Technical Director of the First accused company. He is only a paid employee. He cannot be prosecuted for signing the MoU, which he did on the instruction of his employer. He is not the guarantor for the car loan availed by the 1 st accused in the name of Senthamizhan. The 3 rd accused, who is the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.2830/2019 contented that, he as the Manager of the REPCO Bank, permitted ATM Infotech and others to open accounts in his Bank on proper application and submission of necessary documents. He is not privy to the alleged conspiracy to cheat or fabricate documents. Their applications for discharge was dismissed by the Court below on 16/07/2018 by assigning reasons based on the records.