Madras High Court Allows Revision Petition Against Work Managers at TANSI Foundry & Engineering Works

Must Read

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

[HUL – Sebamed Ad War] Bombay High Court Passed Injunction; Permits Sebamed Ad Against HUL’s Dove

The ad war between the German personal care brand Sebamed and the consumer goods giant Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has come to an end. On January 19th, Bombay High Court passed an injunction order permitting the Sebamed ad against Hindustan Unilever’s Dove without any changes. It was observed that Sebamed ads were backed with evidence-based data. However, Sebamed was ordered to put an end to its advertisement that compared HUL soap bars Lux, Pears, and Santoor with Rin and detergent category.

Bombay High Court Says White Collar Crimes Are More Dangerous Than Murder and Dacoity

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court rejected 4 petitions of 4 businessmen after observing that white-collar crimes are more serious than murder and dacoity. The businesspersons were booked for fraud of evading GST by producing fake invoices.

Right To Protection Can’t Be Granted To Married Woman Involved in Live-in Relationship: Allahabad High Court

The Bench of Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition of a live-in couple, observing that a married woman in a live-in relationship is not entitled to any sort of legal protection whatsoever. The Court remarked that they are adults and should live as ‘husband and wife’ if they want no one to interfere in their lives.

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

[Sushant Singh Rajput Case]: Republic TV & Times Now Hindered Investigation Probe Says Bombay HC

In November last year, the Court had reserved its judgement on the PILs that came from 8 former police officers from Maharashtra, lawyers, activists and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case.

Follow us

The petitioner V. Muthuirulandi was a Manager of TANSI Foundry and Engineering Works, Tirunelveli during 2014-15. The respondents were alleged to have created a Bogus Job Card pursuant to the order of 75 transformers from the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board.

The petitioner had previously filed a suit against the respondents but it was dismissed by the courts without following due course of the inquiry. This Criminal Revision case is thus, filed as against the order passed by the Special Judge, Special Court for Vigilance and Anticorruption Cases, Madurai. 

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was a Foreman Grade- I and also a Manager of TANSI Foundry and Engineering Works, Tirunelveli during the year 2014-2015. The company got an order from the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board for 75 transformers. The order was completed in four months from the date of the order.

The petitioner alleged that the first respondent drew some raw material from the stores by preparing a Bogus Job Card to an extent of Rs. 61, 391. He handed over the same to the second respondent, who in turn handed it over to the third respondent. The raw material was sold by the respondents and was said to have defrauded  TANSI Foundry and Engineering Works. 

The petitioner had lodged a complaint to the Managing Director, who initiated an inquiry against the respondents. However, it did not see any progress. The petitioner then filed a Writ Petition in the Madras High Court.

The Court disposed of the case, noting that disciplinary proceedings against an employee must be left to the discretion of the employer and a fellow employee will have no locus standi. Thereafter, the petitioner went to the Director of Vigilance and Anticorruption Department and the Director of Vigilance and Anticorruption. However, there was no cognizance taken. 

The petitioner, with no alternative left, filed a complaint under Section 191(b) of CrPC before the Special Court for Vigilance and Anticorruption. 

Arguments before the Court

The counsel for the petitioner cited three judgments, one from Kerala HC and two from Supreme Court. 

Pursuant to this revision petition, notice was issued to the respondents. The petitioner also issued a private notice and also filed a proof affidavit. However, there was still no representation for the respondents. 

Thus, the Court proceeded with the case with available exhibits. 

Court’s Observations

The Court marked all the documents provided by the petitioner as Ex 1- 12. The Court took notice of one of the cases cited by the counsel of the petitioner. In the case of National Bank of Oman Vs. Barakara Abdul Aziz, the Supreme Court opined:

“…The duty of a Magistrate receiving a complaint is set out in Section 202 of the Cr.P.C and there is an obligation on the Magistrate to find out if there is any matter which calls for an investigation by a criminal Court. The scope of enquiry under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. is, therefore, limited to the ascertainment of truth or falsehood of the allegations made in the complaint (I) on the materials placed by the complainant before the Court (ii) for the limited purpose of finding out whether a prima facie case for the issue of the process has been made out; and (iii) for deciding the question purely from the point of view of the complainant without at all adverting to any defence the accused may have.” 

The Court found that there is a prima facie case for an enquiry. But the Special Judge dismissed the complaint without following the due process. It is only after an enquiry or investigation can it be ascertained whether the documents produced are sufficient to proceed with the complaint or not. 

The Court further found that the complaint is of a serious nature and the documents produced (Exs 1- 12) by the petitioner were enough to issue a rightful enquiry. 

Court’s Decision

The revision petition was allowed by the Court. The Court directed the Special Judge to pass an order for an enquiry by the competent authority to ascertain if there is any truth in the complaint. The Court also allowed the Special Court to proceed against the petitioner if there’s no truth to be found after the said investigation.

Click here to view the original judgement


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

[HUL – Sebamed Ad War] Bombay High Court Passed Injunction; Permits Sebamed Ad Against HUL’s Dove

The ad war between the German personal care brand Sebamed and the consumer goods giant Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has come to an end. On January 19th, Bombay High Court passed an injunction order permitting the Sebamed ad against Hindustan Unilever’s Dove without any changes. It was observed that Sebamed ads were backed with evidence-based data. However, Sebamed was ordered to put an end to its advertisement that compared HUL soap bars Lux, Pears, and Santoor with Rin and detergent category.

Bombay High Court Says White Collar Crimes Are More Dangerous Than Murder and Dacoity

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court rejected 4 petitions of 4 businessmen after observing that white-collar crimes are more serious than murder and dacoity. The businesspersons were booked for fraud of evading GST by producing fake invoices.

Right To Protection Can’t Be Granted To Married Woman Involved in Live-in Relationship: Allahabad High Court

The Bench of Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition of a live-in couple, observing that a married woman in a live-in relationship is not entitled to any sort of legal protection whatsoever. The Court remarked that they are adults and should live as ‘husband and wife’ if they want no one to interfere in their lives.

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

[Sushant Singh Rajput Case]: Republic TV & Times Now Hindered Investigation Probe Says Bombay HC

In November last year, the Court had reserved its judgement on the PILs that came from 8 former police officers from Maharashtra, lawyers, activists and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case.

Women Advocates Move To Supreme Court Against the Delhi HC Orders on Resuming Physical Hearing

Another writ petition has been filed by women advocates in the Supreme Court against the decision of the Delhi HC of directing the expansion of physical hearing of cases within the National Capital Territory of Delhi without giving an option to litigants to be represented by their lawyers virtually.

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the provisions of Section 497 (6)...

[WhatsApp Privacy Policy Row] It’s a Private App, Don’t Use It; Says Delhi High Court

On Monday, while hearing a petition regarding the privacy policy of WhatsApp, the Delhi High Court said, “It is a private app. Don't join it. It is a voluntary thing, don't accept it. Use some other app.”

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus. The petition sought to direct...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -