PRASANNADEVI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision is directed by the 7th accused aggrieved by the dismissal of the petition filed under section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to discharge her from the criminal proceedings in C. C. No. 47 of 2006.

(2.) THE revision petitioner ranked as A7 has contended that she had nothing to do with the partnership firm which is facing trial alongwith the other accused for the offence alleged to have been committed under the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1997. The financial institution was purely a private business venture of the deceased Balasundaram. She was not a partner. Nor was she involved in the affairs of the financial institution. The statements obtained by the respondent police from various witnesses do not make out any offence as against the petitioner. She has been implicated for the simple reason that she is the wife of the second accused N. Kanagasabai. Therefore, the petitioner has sought for discharge from the criminal prosecution launched by the respondent.

(3.) THE respondent has contended that A1 to A8 committed default in repayment of deposits and interests to the de facto complainants even after maturity. The petitioner ranked as A7 actively participated in the business of the financial establishment inasmuch as she canvassed and collected deposits from the depositors. It is contended that as she had taken responsibility for the management of the affairs of the financial establishment, she has been charge-sheeted by the respondent police.