K.G. NATESAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Revision Petitioners/Accused 1 to 4 have preferred the instant Criminal Revision Petition before this Court as against the order dated 11.02.2014 in Crl.M.P.No.1467 of 2013 in Crl.M.P.No.450 of 2010 passed by the Learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Erode.

(2.) The Learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Erode, while passing the impugned order in Crl.M.P.No.1467 of 2013 in Crl.M.P.NO.450 of 2010, on 11.02.2014, had, in paragraph 10, inter alia, observed, that '... In view of the fact that the Court itself impliedly extended the interim attachment from 18.3.2011 and passed orders for effecting attachment and attachment warrant etc., the attachment cannot be invalidated merely on the ground that no specific order passed. In the meanwhile, the memos also filed by the respondent. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be contended by the petitioners that the attachment has to be raised. Having regard to the nature of the crime registered against the accused and the properties are allegedly acquired disproportionate to the known source of income, at this stage, if the attachment is raised, the very purpose and object of the act will be defeated. Hence, it is ordered the attachment shall continue till the criminal proceedings are over. Therefore, the petition filed by the petitioners cannot be entertained' etc. and resultantly dismissed the petition.

(3.) According to the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners/Accused, the case came to be registered against the 1st Petitioner in respect of an offence under Section 13(1)(e) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act on 18.07.2008 by the Respondent on the allegation that he is in possession of assets which are disproportionate to his known sources of income and further, the 1st Petitioner was the Chief Engineer (Project) Civil, TNEB, Erode region. Also that, he retired on 31.05.2011.