Allowed

Subramanian v. The Chief Manager

Madras HC19 Jul 2024WP(MD)/14739/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired State Bank of India employee, an accused in an economic offence case, sought defreezing of his pension account attached during investigation. Invoking the principle underlying Section 11 of the Pensions' Act, 1871, the court held pension from past service was unconnected to the alleged crime and directed the bank to defreeze the account.

What did the court decide?

Direction to first respondent to defreeze the petitioner's pension account and permit operation; protection limited to the pension amount only.

Subramanian Vs The Chief Manager — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.14739 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.07.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.14739 of 2024

¶7

Subramanian ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Karaikudi Branch, Sivagangai District.

¶10

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Sivagangai District, Madurai Region. ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

¶12

praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st Respondent to defreeze the pension account No.31671689347 of the petitioner by considering

¶13

the representation of the petitioner dated 05.06.2024.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Balaji

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.S.Anwar Sameem for R1. Mr.A.Albert James, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) for R2.

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

1/6

¶18

W.P(MD)No.14739 of 2024

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Heard learned counsel on either side.

¶21

2.The writ petitioner is a retired employee of State Bank of India. He was associated with a financial establishment known “New Raise Alayam Small Finance Banking”. It said to have cheated depositors to the tune of Rs.300 Crores. Crime No.7 of 2022 was registered on the file Economic Offences Wing, Madurai on 23.08.2022. It was subsequently transferred to Economic Offences Wing, Sivagangai. The petitioner is figuring as Accused No.23. He was arrested and was in custody for thirty days. The petitioner's pension account was also attached. For de-freezing the same, this writ petition came to be filed.

¶22

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner draws my attention to Section 11 of the Pensions' Act, 1871. It reads as follows:-

¶23

“ 11. Exemption of pension from attachment .—No pension granted or continued by Government on political considerations, or on account of past services or present infirmities or as a compassionate allowance, and no money due or to become due on account of any such pension or allowance, shall be liable to seizure, attachment or

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

2/6

¶26

W.P(MD)No.14739 of 2024

¶27

sequestration by process of any Court 3***, at the instance of a creditor, for any demand against the pensioner, or in satisfaction of a decree or order of any such Court.

¶28

[This section applies 3*** also to pensions granted or continued, after the separation of Burma from India, by the Government of Burma.]”

¶29

4.Even though the said provision may not directly apply to the a bank employee, I can definitely invoke the principle underlying the said provision. The petitioner had served State Bank of India and he is being paid pension in view of his past service. The pension earned by the petitioner has nothing to do with his involvement as director of a defaulting financial establishment. It is the case of the second respondent that the amount in the petition mentioned account represents the proceeds of any crime.

¶30

5.In this view of the matter, I direct the first respondent to de-freeze the petition mentioned account and permit the petitioner to operate the same. The learned counsel for the petitioner gives an undertaking that the petitioner will not use the said account for any other purpose. The protection given in this writ petition against attachment will be available only for the petitioner's pension amount and nothing else.

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

3/6

¶33

W.P(MD)No.14739 of 2024

¶34

6.The writ petition is allowed on these terms. No costs.

¶35

19.07.2024

¶36

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias

¶37

To:-

¶38

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Sivagangai District, Madurai Region.

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/6

¶40

W.P(MD)No.14739 of 2024

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6

¶42

W.P(MD)No.14739 of 2024

¶43

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶44

ias

¶45

W.P(MD)No.14739 of 2024

¶46

19.07.2024

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶48

6/6

Subramanian v. The Chief Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subramanian v. The Chief Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mala Vs The District Registrar

D.Muthuraja Vs The Tahsildar

Gopinath.P.N.S Vs The Principal Secretary

Minor.Adlan Zishan Vs The Regional Passport Officer

Manimaran Vs The District Collector

S.Pandiyan Vs The District Collector