Thiru.T.V. Hemanandakumar, B.A., L.L.B.

, Judgements
Total Judgements 19
OS Property judgements 11 All attachment petition approved-
Final Case Judgements 19-11=8
Convict
Judgement date Judgement Sections Observation
/Acquit
CC/11/2019 / 22-04-2021 I Year RI +Rs1000 406 IPC
1 Convicted Chit fund
Markantan -PP 4 Year RI +Rs5000 Sec 5 TNPID
5 Acquitted 4 Year RI +Rs5000 1 Mnth Trail/ 4 mnth for
Ranjith -Defense. 420 IPC
I Year RI Judgement
Sec 4 Prize /Chit

CC 4/2019 /27-01-2021 2 Convicted 17 Mnth Trail/ 2 week for

I Year RI +Rs1000 406 IPC
Ramani, -PP & Balaji & 0 Acquitted 5 Year RI +Rs4000 Judgement 2 Partners
Sec 5 TNPID
Pandidurai blaming each other

I Year RI 406 IPC

CC 5/2015/ 09-03-2021 1 Convicted
7 Year RI +Rs5000 Sec 5 TNPID 9 Mnth Trail/ 4 years
Ramani, -PP & Kannan 4 Year RI +Rs5000 420 IPC Judgement
15 yr old case/ 4 years for
CC 12/2013 /16-03-2021 1 Convicted I Year RI 406 IPC
1 Year RI +Rs1000 Judgement.. promissory
Ramani, -PP & Kalaivani Sec 5 TNPID
notes = Malafide Intentions
CC 29/2013 /31-03-2021
1 Acquitted. 14 yr old case 4 Mnth Trail/ 2
Ramani, -PP &
The owner week Judgement Accused
Sureshkumar
had died... was not responsible

CC 32/2013 /21-04-2021 1 Convicted - 3 Mnth Trail/ 3 Mnth

4 Year RI +Rs10000 Sec 5 TNPID
Markantan -PP & 2 Acquitted I Year RI +Rs1000 Judgement
406 IPC
Senthilkumar Partial Refunds effected
6 Yr Trail/ 2 Yr Judgement.
CC 49/2008 /19-02-2021 3 Convicted 4 Yr RI +Rs1500 X 4 Sec 5 TNPID
I Year RI X 4 Count Partial Settlements @ Lok
Markantan -PP & Ranjith, 406 IPC
Adhalath.
5 Year RI +Rs10000 Sec 5 TNPID
CC 4/2008 /31-12-2020 2 convicted 17 Mnth Trail/ 8 Year
I Year RI 406 IPC
Ramani, -PP & Sundar . I Year RI +Rs1000 Judgement. Lenience -Age
4120 (B) IPC
 TNPID COIMBATORE -5 Sep 2020 (Example)
CR.M.P.NO.791 OF 2020
Rajesh, - Ashok Farms copra’s Petitioner/ A2 vs State, rep. D.S.P., E.O.W. - ii, Erode.
...

PETITION PLEA
permit him to examine and settle the dues to remaining depositors under SEC.311 OF CR.P.C.
PETITION BACKGROUND
• Petitioner IN JUDICIAL CUSTODY for 8 months
• Had Settled 7 depositors; balance 77 out of 89 depositors have to be settled.
• 4 years after evidence recording-
• NBW arrest was executed because of delay tactics

JUDGEMENT
PETITION DISMISSED. PETITIONER BACK TO PRISON.

MAIN CONSIDERATIONS IN JUDGEMENT

-Not cross examining amounted to delay tactics.
-No steps has been taken in the past (about 8 years) to settle the dues to the victims.
-No explanation has been given as to how he is going to settle the said huge amount,
-Successfully dragged on the case from 2015 onwards without any specific reason

JUDGEMENT STATUS/ ENVIROMENT

Final argument and final judgement was still due on the date of Judgment.
 TNPID Madurai -19 Feb 2021 (Ref erence case)
State, rep. By I. P District Crime Branch, Theni. vs. Aandal Motors Coimbatore.

PETITION PLEA
TNPID calendar case , u/s.5 of TNPID Act, 420, 406, 120(B) IPC
PETITION BACKGROUND
• 64 depositors / 14 Complainants
• Had Settled 10 depositors;
. Had remitted funds for further settlement.
• 4 depositors claimed Cheating case and had not taken settlement

JUDGEMENT
3 persons Convicted under 406 IPC and u/s.5 of TNPID Act, (1+ 4 years + Fine)
Punishment specified each of the 4 Counts, Concurrent Punishment
No Punishment under IPC 420 and 120 (B)

MAIN CONSIDERATIONS IN JUDGEMENT

- Investment and subsequent breach of trust is proved
-Intention to cheat and Conspiracy charges not proved
-Old Case One accused had died.

JUDGEMENT STATUS/ ENVIROMENT

Settlement for 4 depositors from available funds after appeal period.
 TNPID Madurai -27 Jan 2021 (Ref erence case)
State, rep. By EOW II Karur,. vs. Anupam Capitals, Karur.

PETITION PLEA
TNPID calendar case , u/s.5 of TNPID Act, 420, 406, 120(B) IPC
PETITION BACKGROUND
• 5 depositors / Rs.41 Cr. Deposit.
• Company closed
• Arbitrator award -Rs.15 Cr by Company & Rs.7cr each by two partners
• One Partner had filed Insolvency.
• Another Partner settled as per arbitrator agreement
• Most transactions had Promissory Note / Cheque security.

JUDGEMENT
Both accused Convicted u/s 406 IPC and 5 of TNPID Act, (1+ 5 years + Fine)
Concurrent Punishment
No Punishment under IPC 420 and 120 (B)
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS IN JUDGEMENT
- Investment and subsequent breach of trust is proved
-All settlements done privately and then informed to Court,

JUDGEMENT STATUS/ ENVIROMENT

Two week for Judgement after Trials
 Madurai High Court-19 July 2017 (Ref erence Judgement)

PETITION BACKGROUND
Permission was granted by TNPID to effect a private sale of attached property and do
settlement.
.

JUDGEMENT
Permission granted by TNPID, the sale of the property are set aside

MAIN CONSIDERATIONS IN JUDGEMENT

Strong observations on Norms that are to be followed in TNPID attachments
TNPID Judge, DRO, Government attorney and concerned officials indicated.

TNPID Madurai -8 Mar 2021 (Ref erence)

PETITION BACKGROUND
Permission to attach a Property by DRO – which was sold in a suspicious manner
before attachment date to a private Party .
.

JUDGEMENT
TNPID allows making the attachment absolute, the sale of the property before
attachment date termed as Malafide
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS IN JUDGEMENT
Strong observations on mal-practices that are followed in TNPID property cases.
 TNPID Madurai -8 Mar 2021 (Ref erence)

PETITION BACKGROUND
Permission to attach a Property by Competent authority – which was under
hypothecation to Banks .
.

JUDGEMENT
TNPID allows making the attachment absolute, the sale proceeds by public
auction is to be distributed to Banks on Priority basis.
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS IN JUDGEMENT
Clear observations on Bank claims in TNPID property cases.
Banks to receive Interests.

Madurai High Court -8 Aug 2019 (Ref erence Judgement)

PETITION BACKGROUND
TNPID completed a case and ordered acquittal and released Attached Properties.
One depositor proved that not all depositors were addressed by TNPID.

JUDGEMENT
High Court sets aside the TNPID judgement of Acquittal and orders
reinvestigation and Retrial.
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS IN JUDGEMENT
Knowledge of the TNPID judge on Missing depositor’s name cited.
String strictures against Investigating authority.