M.SOUNDARAJAN Vs. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions have been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.Nos.98, 99, 102, 105, 106, 107, 108, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Musiri and consequential all further proceedings as against the petitioner.

(2.) The crux of the complaint is that the first accused was the President of the Thulaiyanatham Primary Agricultural Co-operative Credit Society and the second accused was the Secretary of the said Society, the third accused was working as Senior Clerk in the above society and the accused 4 to 6 are other employees of the said society. While the seventh accused was working as Circle Supervisor of the Tiruchirappalli District Central Co-operative Bank the other two accused were working as Special Officer in the said society during the relevant period. The petitioners herein was working as Co-operative Audit Officers. It is further alleged that the first and second accused, while they were working in the society, abused their official position, have fabricated documents as if loan was given to 20 members of the said society. They have also committed falsification of accounts and fabrication documents as if loan was granted to two members by pledging the Fixed Deposit Receipts and thereby misappropriated the funds of the society. The Deputy Registrar of the Co-operative Societies had directed the Co- operative Sub-Registrar, who is an official of the Co-operative Department, conducted statutory enquiry under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. The Enquiry Officer had elaborately conducted the enquiry and submitted his report holding that all the irregularities and misappropriation of the Society's fund were committed by the then Secretary and other employees of the Society.

(3.) On the basis of the enquiry report submitted under Section 81 of the Act, the Deputy Registrar of the Co-operative Societies, the third respondent herein, had lodged a complaint to the respondent police, viz., the Inspector of Police, Commercial Crime Investigation Wing, Trichy and the case was registered as against the then Secretary and other employees. As many as 11 persons have been arrayed as accused in the First Information Report. It is pertinent to note at this juncture that neither the name of the petitioners is found place in the First Information Report nor any allegation was made against him. During the investigation, number of witnesses were enquired including the members of the Cooperative Bank to whose accounts the misappropriation was alleged to have been committed and their statements were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. After completion of investigation, the respondent police filed the charge sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Musiri. To the shock and surprise of the petitioners, they were arrayed as 10th and 11th accused in the charge sheet. The learned Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence not only against the main offender, but also against the petitioners. Being aggrieved over the order of taking cognizance, the petitioners have come forward with these petitions.