2.The facts of the case are as follows:(a).The first appellant Mr.S.Thuraisingam, proprietor of M/s.Bharathi Gems and Jewels floated advertisements promising attractive offers under the following schemes viz., A.Bharathi Gems and Jewels; B.Bharathi Subhayagam; C.Bharathi Hire Purchase Scheme; D.Bharathi Saving Scheme; E.Bharathi Gems and Travels.By means of the above schemes, the first respondent dishonestly induced the depositors to part with various amounts.The allegation made in the said complaint is that the complainant had invested in various schemes with the first appellanthttp://www.judis.nic.in and on maturity of the deposits, cheques were issued towards payment 4 of the sum due to him, however on presentation those cheques were dishonoured.Thereafter, number of depositors came forward alleging that their deposits were not repaid.While few cases were compounded/withdrawn on payment of the defaulted sums, presently three cases viz., C.C.No.8038/2001 and C.C.No.6028/2001 on the file of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and C.C.No.155/2001 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Madurai are pending trial.(c).After registration of cases, Tamil Nadu Protection of Interest of Depositors Act was enacted and as per Section 3 of the said Act, the 5 respondent Competent Authority was empowered to attach the properties of the defaulting accused and the properties purchased out of the sums collected from the depositors.The relevant provisions of the said Act reads as follows:"3.Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force:-(i)where, upon complaints received from a number of depositors, that any Financial Establishment defaults the return of deposits after maturity, orNo.918, Home (Courts II A) Department, dated 16.07.1998 interim attachment ofhttp://www.judis.nic.in movable and immovable properties were made and subsequently, the 6 interim attachment was made absolute by the order of the Special Court for TNPID Act, Chennai.(e).Even prior to the order of absolute attachment u/s 7 of TNPID Act, the first appellant S.Thuraisingam entered into a Memorandum of Undertaking with the depositors association represented by one Mr.G.E.Krishnan and approached this Hon'ble Court praying for permission to reopen the business premises to revive the business.This Court by an order dated 20.03.2003 made in C.M.A.No.1632/2001 permitted the first appellant to open the business premises and possession of some of the properties under interim attachment were handed over to him.The first appellant re-opened the showroom on 10.10.2003, but he was not able to revive the business and thus was not able to fulfill the obligations made under the Memorandum of Understanding with the depositors association.(g).In the said circumstances, the Competent Authority sought and obtained permission of this Court for sale of the immovable properties 7 and thereafter by auction sale of the properties, a sum of Rs.12,65,25,000/- was realized and the same was deposited into State Bank of India, PWD Branch, Chennai by the Competent Authority.Pursuant to the orders of the Division Bench of this Court dated 16.09.2008, the Competent Authority was directed to issue Sales Certificate to the auction purchaser – Elite Builders and Constructions.Thereafter, on the orders of this Court, the Competent Authority gave paper publication in all the leading news papers on 21.09.2008, 24.10.2008, 02.12.2009 and 03.12.2009 calling upon the defaulters to make their claim.Pursuant to the paper publication, the depositors claim was arrived at Rs.14,81,32,450/- after scrutiny of the deposit receipts made with the claims.(h).Again the Competent Authority approached this Court for necessary directions for disbursal of the amount to the depositors and as per the order passed by this Court, the eligible depositors received the deposits without interest on Pro-rata basis which was arrived at 90% and 3722 depositors were paid by the Competent Authority.(i).The Competent Authority also paid the statutory dues of the first appellant, viz., a sum of Rs.1,18,62,719/- to the commercial tax department and Rs.23,31,596/- to the income tax department.(j).Subsequently, by August 2010, another 400 depositors came forward seeking repayment of their deposits.At this stage, the present appealshttp://www.judis.nic.in came to be filed by the appellants seeking compounding of the pending three cases other than the cases compounded earlier on payment of the 8 defaulter claims and also seeking payment of Rs.29,34,500/- towards rent, food, maintenance and defence charges from the year 1996 to 2009, as per Sec.10(a) of TNPID3.The appellants filed the application in O.S.No.16 of 2009 under Section 5A of TNPID Act, 1997 to direct the competent authority to collect the various amounts available and to bring everything to the account and disburse the statutory due, after negotiation and then arrive the amount and the same to be disbursed to the depositors on proportionate basis and also direct the Respondents 1 & 3 therein to compound the offence stated to have been committed by the appellants/accused and discharge them from the case.5.The evidence was recorded based on the pleadings filed by both the parties and finally, both the applications were dismissed holding that the cases in C.C.No.6028/2001 and C.C.No.8038/2001 have been transferred and pending on the file of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and the case in C.C.No.151/2002 has been pending on thehttp://www.judis.nic.in file of the Judicial Magistrate No.Moreover, the matter has been seized of by the High Court and therefore, the appellants were directed to approach the proper form and the Special Court refused to give any directions.These two orders are now being challenged before this Court.7.This Court perused the entire records and various reports filed by the third respondent/Investigating Agency.As per the order of this Court, the third respondent published notice in the newpapers calling for the claims.Further, various reports have been filed by the competent authority.8.By an order dated 08.11.2017, this Court directed the authorities to make paper publication to be effected in one of the issue of "Malai Murasu", tamil daily and "News Today", English daily informing the depositors to approach the Investigating Officer in the above case within a period of 10 days from the date of publication, failing which no claim application wouldhttp://www.judis.nic.in be entertained, even if the depositors are found to be genuine.When the matter was listed on 21.12.2017, it was represented before the Court that 180 claims have been made along with the original receipts issued by the appellants and they filed the list of claimants before this Court.10.By an order dated 09.03.2018, this Court recorded the statement of Ms.11.Thereafter, this Court by an order dated 26.03.2018 passed the following order:-"Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, a status report has been filed by the Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Chennai, giving the following details.3.Pursuant to the publication, claims were made to the tune of Rs.78,18,550/- from the depositors.Out of those depositors, a few depositors whose claim is valued at Rs.11,19,300/- have not produced the original deposit receipts and they had filed only hire purchase agreement, cheques and receipts.Therefore, the claim of the persons, who have produced the deposit receipts is only to the tune of Rs.66,99,250/-.The amount available, as on date, in cash is Rs.1,47,22,631/- and the depositors claim is Rs.78,18,550/-.Thus, the remaining amount is Rs.69,04,081/-.Out of Rs.69,04,081, a sumhttp://www.judis.nic.in of Rs.9,00,000/- is to be retained as deposit for some time and the 12 balance amount of Rs.60,04,081/- is required to be returned to the appellants, apart from the jewellery and precious materials.For filing of the calculation memo, both by the appellants as well as the respondents, call the matter on 28.03.2018."Out of the said amount, a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- is to be retained as deposit for some time and the balance amount of Rs.60,04,081/- is required to be returned to the appellants, apart from the jewellery and precious materials.13.In the said report the authorities have stated that the appellants' vehicle which were kept in the police custody were damaged due to the rusting and natural calamities.As they were parked in open area, the vehicles were damaged beyond recognition and the same cannot be even used as scrap.14.On consideration of the material on record, it is evident that the appellants had never absconded nor concealed any of the properties with an intention to evade payments to the depositors, but on the contra had been rendering all assistance in liquidation of the properties for the purposehttp://www.judis.nic.in of settling the dues to the depositors.Hence, as contemplated under 13 Section 5(A) of TNPID Act, the offence committed by the appellants can be compounded on payment of the entire dues payable to the depositors.15.In view of the aforesaid position, the following directions are issued:All the accused are acquitted from all the offences registered against them.The Investigating Officer is directed to return the balance amount available with them, after retaining the amount which is required to be paid to the remaining depositors.The Investigating Officer is directed to return the machineries and other valuables available with them.The Investigating Officer shall not entertain any further claims.The Banks of America and Citi Bank which are holding the account or deposits of Bharathi Finance or other sister concerns shall give back the amount with interest to the first appellant.The learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore and learned Judicial Magistrate I, Madurai are directed to handover the precious metals, jewellery and stones available under their custody to the first appellant directly.If any further clarification is required, it is always left open to the parties to approach this Court.16.These Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are disposed of with the above directions.Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.No costs.17.12.2019 pgp Note: Issue order copy on 23.01.20202.State, Rep by Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chennai - 8, Now by ADGP EOW II Police, Chennai.http://www.judis.nic.in 15 N.KIRUBAKARAN, J.pgp C.M.A.Nos.1323 & 1324 of 2010http://www.judis.nic.in

Cited provisions: Section 409 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 506 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 120 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 420 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 3 in The Indian Penal Code