AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.N. Prakash, J.—Heard Mr. Venkatesh Mahadevan, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. S. Shunmugavelayutham, learned Public Prosecutor for the Respondent.
The Petitioner, who was arrested on 20.9.2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 370, 407 & 272 of IPC in Crime No. 5 of 2014 on the file of the Respondent Police, seeks bail.
The Investigating Officer has filed a detailed Counter strongly objecting to the grant of bail to the Petitioner:
"5. It is submitted that on 19.8.2014, at 23.00 hrs. Sub-Inspector of Police, Vellimedupettai Police Station, conducted vehicle check along with his party, and intercepted. Motorcycles bearing Registration No.TN-25-AH-4102, Yamaha Motorcycle driven by Suresh @ Suresh Babu, Tiruvannamalai and TN-19Y-8564 Hero Honda Motorcycle driven by Anbu @ Anbarasan of Ranipet. During interrogation, both of them have confessed about then involvement in many house breaking cases and attention diversion cases and also stated voluntarily that they have committed theft of milk about 1800 liters, from a Tanker Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-19-X-3618, which transported milk from Tiruvannamalai to Aavin. Chennai. They also confessed of replacing the quantity of stolen milk with available water form a nearby well Tr. Suresh @ Suresh Babu has categorically confessed before official witnesses that Lorry drivers of Deepika Transport, Chennai were also collusive in this pilferage and adulteration and the owner of the above transport, the Petitioner/Accused too has got knowledge about the same. During CBCID investigation it is ascertained that the Petitioner/Accused is the owner of the Deepika Transport and South India Road Milk Transport, Chennai. It is to be mentioned specifically that the said Deepika Transport stands in the name of Tmt. Revathi, who is the spouse of the Petitioner/Accused Vaithiyanathan. Investigation further revealed that the owners of the above. Transports are well aware of the crime and they have perpetrated this crime, with the assistance of their Lorry Drivers.
It is submitted that, during the course of investigation Accused Suresh @ Suresh Babu and one Elumalai gave voluntary confession before the official witnesses. On the basis of the said confession of the Accused-Suresh @ Suresh Babu, 1800 liters of stolen milk in 45 milk cans, 2 Motorcycles, 2 four wheelers viz. TATA ACE TN-31-J-6787 and TATA XENON TN-24-AW-4147, empty milk cans numbering 50, cash Rs. 77,000/-, jewels weighing 5 sovereigns, etc. had been seized from him, under cover of mahazars. Subsequently, Sub-Inspector of Police, Vellimedupettai Police Station has brought the Accused to the Police Station and registered a case against Accused (1) Suresh, s/o Palani, (2) Anbu. s/o Raja, (3) Smesk s/o Velayudha Goundar, (4) Ramesh, s/o Palani, (5) Guna, s/o Chandran (6) Murugan, s/o Vadivel, (7) Sathiyaran, s/o Muniappan, and (8) Elumalai, s/o Kannappan in Vellimedupettai PS Cr. No 122 2014 under Section 120-B, 379, 407, 272, IPC. The above Accused were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 20.8.2014.
It is submitted that confession of Accused-Suresh Babu reveals that Lorry drivers of Deepika Transport are in the habit of informing their departure to Accused Suresh @ Suresh Babu that they left with milk load and colluded with him to commit theft of Aavin milk. Accused-Suresh Babu has also stated in his confession about the knowledge of Deepika Transport, South India Road Milk Transport, Chennai, owner the Petitioner/Accused Tr. Vaidyanathan about the offences of theft and adulteration of Aavin milk. He further confessed that Tr. Vaidyanathan the Petitioner/Accused do not pay the diesel expenses and driver allowance sufficiently to the drivers; also the Petitioner/Accused would ask his drivers to adjust those expenses from the benefits of crime."
From what is stated above, it appears that the local Police accidentally stumbled upon a potty thief by name, Suresh and on his interrogation the fact relating to wholesome adulteration of Aavin Milk came to light. Aavin is a State owned Organisation and it supplies milk in sachets and bulk catering to the household needs of millions of consumers in the State. On account of the seriousness of the case, the Director General of Police transferred the case front Vellumedu Pettai Police Station to the Crime Bench CBCID for thorough investigation on 1.9.2014. As stated above, Suresh was arrested by the local Police on 20.8.2014 for offences under Sections 379, 407, 272 & 120-B. IPC and the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1. Tindivanam granted bail on 1.9.2014 on the ground that he was in custody for 21 days Perhaps at that time nobody realized the magnitude and the seriousness of the offence. When CBCID took over the investigation, it came to light that Vaidyanathan/Petitioner is the main Contractor, who was awarded the contract by Aavin to collect milk from various Cooperative Societies by Special Tanker Lorries and transport them to the various processing centres of Aavin from where the processed milk would be filled in sachets and distributed through consumer outlets.
Mr. Abudu Kumar Rajarathinam, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the investigation has been completed and Final Report has also been filed in this case and that, even according to the prosecution, whenever the drivers demanded increase in wages, this Petitioner exhorted them to contact Suresh, who would pay them sufficient money, if they act according to his bidding. He further contended that, there is no evidence to show that this Petitioner gained any pecuniary advantage by adulterating the milk and selling them to various bulk purchasers as alleged by the prosecution. He further stated that, even according to the prosecution the loss was only Rs.2,88,700/- and several Accused, who purchased the milk were granted bail by this Court on condition that they deposit the amount that was lost by Aavin.
It is true that Suresh was granted bail by the concerned Magistrate and this Court had granted bail to two of the purchasers of the milk, who came forward to make good the loss sustained by Aavin. This Petitioner does not stand on the same footing as that of the others This Petitioner owns about 40 Milk Tankers and his wife Revathi (A2) and had taken the contract from Aavin for collection and transport of milk and they were monopolizing this business for a long time. There are enough materials to show that this Petitioner was aware of the illicit activity that was being carried on by Suresh and in fact it has been happening on the active blessings of this Petitioner as could be seen from Section 164, Cr.P.C. statement recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Villupuram, of an Accused, by name, Periyasamy (A7).
Mr. Abudu Kumar Rajarathinam, learned Counsel contended that the confession of Periyasamy should not be relied upon as that has been obtained by the Police on coercion. It is seen that Periyasamy was granted Anticipatory Bail by the Sessions Court despite the objection by the State on 26 8 2014 in Crl.P.P. No 6380 of 2014 and his Confession Statement was recorded by the learned Magistrate only on 7.10.2014 after making preliminary enquiries with him on 6 10.2014. Periyasamy (A7) has clearly stated to the learned Magistrate that when he demanded money from his owner (the Petitioner herein) for diesel he was directed to contact the other drivers, who would teach him how to generate money and accordingly, on the instructions of Suresh, he had taken the Tanker Lorries with the collected milk several times to various places and after removing out fresh milk he had mixed equal quantity of water to maintain the quantity. He has also stated that he would carefully remove the seal and after the operation he would carefully put back the seal on the cans. Similarly, one Arumugam, who was a driver of a Tanker Lorry owned by this Petitioner has also given a statement under Section 164, Cr.P.C.
From a reading of the Statements of Witnesses recorded by the Police and by the learned Magistrate, it appears that this Petitioner and his wife Revathi (A2) were running Tanker Lorries, in the name, Deepika Transport and South India Road Milk Transport (A3). The drivers were neither paid sufficient salary nor they were given money for diesel, instead, they were directed to contact Suresh and on his directions, the milk collected in cans from various places were taken to specified destinations where the seals on the cans were carefully removed and the milk was transferred into containers brought by bulk purchasers of milk for ready cash, to be shared by Suresh and the drivers. The drivers were directed to defray the expenses for fuel and also keep the balance for themselves. Under such a scheme, the argument that the drivers did not make any payment directly to the Petitioner cannot hold water because the Petitioner has taken a contract from Aavin for a certain huge amount and was able to carry on with the tender by giving a free hand to his drivers to make money illegally. Plus is my opinion is a very insidious scheme where everyone was making money at his own level at the cost of poor consumers, who have all along given adulterated milk.
What is surprising to this Court is that, the milk procured from various producers should have to be tested for quality at the reception centre by Aavin officials of quality Control Department. It is obvious from the statements of drivers and co-accused that they have been supplying to Aavin, milk mixed with water. How could the officials have missed detecting adulteration? The involvement of Aavin officials in this scheme of the investigation and filed a Final Report before the learned India Road. Milk Transport, thieves like Suresh, drivers and bulk high places this could never have happened. The CBCID is directed to file a report before the learned Magistrate detailing the investigation that has been conducted by them to find out about the involvement of the officials of Aavin in this offence, failing which, this Court would have no other alternative but to transfer the case to CBI in public interest. The learned Magistrate shall monitor the investigation [See Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P., 2008 (1) MLJ (Crl.) 1393 SC] and send a report to this Court.
As regards contention of Mr. Abudu Kumar Rajarathinam, learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Charge-sheet discloses only loss of Rs. 2.88,700/-, this Court is of the view that the said loss pertains to the gain made by Sudakaran (A20) and Chandrasekar (A21), who are owners of milk Gova Companies and who had purchased milk from Suresh and the drivers. This amount can be, by no stretch of imagination, relate to the pecuniary advantage gained by this Petitioner over a period of time. It is seen that Revathi (A2), the wife of this Petitioner is still absconding.
Taking into consideration the magnitude of the offence against this Petitioner, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.