Kannan @ Kannan Arumugam vs State

T.V.Thamilselvi , J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.03.2024 in Crime No.17 of 2024 registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the founder of Annai Theresa Old Age Home and Annai Theresa Children's Charitable Trust. The trust looks after the well-being of specially abled children and old aged people. Now the defacto complainant gave a complaint stating that the petitioner collected amount from the public in the name of the charity by opening several bank accounts in the name of the trust and transferred the amount to non-trustee personal account and purchased the properties by using the funds of the trust. It is the further case of the prosecution that there is old age home run by the petitioner for charitable purpose, but he collected donation from the public by giving false information. Based on that, the complaint was lodged against the petitioner and the other accused.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that from the year 2012, the petitioner had run the trust without any bad antecedent and now the defacto complainant had some ulterior motive by lodging this complaint. He further submitted that the petitioner had purchased the property in his name on valid consideration by his own earnings and he is ready to abide any condition even to deposit the sale deeds to the credit of crime number and hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) stated that the complaint is now transferred to CCB, Chennai. But except the defacto complainant, they have not received any complaint from the public sofar. Investigation is under progress.

5.On perusal of the documents produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it reveals that the petitioner is the founder of the trust with object to run the charity and the trust was created on 02.07.2012. The sale deeds dated 11.02.2021 and 27.10.2022 and the gift deed dated 07.12.2022 reveals that one of the property was stands in the name of the individual and the other two documents were stand in the name of the trust.

6.Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also of the fact that the petitioner is running the trust for more than 10 years and except the de-facto complainant, the respondent Officials has not receive any complaint from the public, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties (Out of which, one must be a blood related surety) each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai-08 and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Tuesday and Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three months and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the credit of Crime No.17 of 2024 within a period of three weeks along with original sale deeds and gift deeds. The petitioner shall not leave from Chennai. for another six months and file affidavit that he will not create any encumbrance over the properties until modification.

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

[g] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.