The High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail petition filed by partners of a medical trading firm accused of siphoning partnership funds via bank transfers, holding that the matter required examination and bail was not inclined to be granted.
Petitioners denied anticipatory bail; Criminal Original Petition dismissed and connected Miscellaneous Petition closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.O.P.No.6555 of 2023 and Crl.M.P.No.8802 of 2023
Crl.O.P.No.6555 of 2023
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.
The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 & A2, seek anticipatory bail in Crime No.2 of 2023 registered by the respondent Police for the offence under Sections 409, 468, 471 and 420 of IPC.
2.The case of the prosecution is that A1 and Selvi and Jayaganesh constituted a partnership firm in the name of Paris Health Care for trading of medicines. The partnership deed was entered into on 11.03.2020. The other two partners namely Selvi and Jayaganesh had invested money in accordance with the partnership deed. The role of the first petitioner was that he infused raw materials and inventories. It had been stated that the first petitioner retired from the partnership firm and his wife, the petitioner herein was inducted as a new partner. Subsequently, Jayaganesh also retired from the firm and his brother, Rajesh Kannan was inducted as a new partner. The reconstitution of the partnership firm was done by a further deed dated 05.06.2020. The defacto complainant had invested a sum of Rs.8,87,979/through his sister Selvi and Jayaganesh invested a sum of Rs.10,21,270/through his brother. The first petitioner had infused raw materials worth
Crl.O.P.No.6555 of 2023
about Rs.2,15,540/- and also provided furniture to the firm. The account of the firm was operated in ICICI Bank. It is contended that the funds were transferred to the personal account of the first petitioner in a separate account in the same ICICI Bank and to his previous account in City Union Bank in the name of Paris Health Care.
3.It is thus contended that the first petitioner had siphoned off the money from the partnership firm.
5.The profit or loss of any partnership firm is to be divided in
accordance with the partnership deed and it cannot be taken away by one particular partner.
2/4
Crl.O.P.No.6555 of 2023
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed.
03.10.2023
vkr
Crl.O.P.No.6555 of 2023
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
vkr
Crl.O.P.No.6555 of 2023
03.10.2023d
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioners accused of misappropriating partnership funds alleging siphoning of money.
Whether the transfer of funds from a joint account to personal accounts constitutes an offence warranting denial of anticipatory bail.
C.V. KARTHIKEYAN
Unnamed Respondent No.1
Unnamed Respondent No.1
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
