IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2011 / 24TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18708 of 2011(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. ULLAS PAUL, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.K.M.POULOSE, KANAYAMPADIKKAL HOUSE, LOURD PURAM, EAST FORT.P.O., THRISSUR. 2. NISHAD.C.R., AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, CHAZHIKULAM HOUSE, KUNDANOOR.P.O., WADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR, COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR. 680 001. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. 680 001. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEECHI POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. 680 001. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, GURUVAYOOR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. 680 506. 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. 680 504. 6. NANO EXCEL ENTERPRISES PVT.LTD., 145/C GROUND FLOOR, OPPOSITE SAI BABA TEMPLE, BENGAL RAO NAGAR, HYDERABAD-53038, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, DR.HAREESH MADDINENI. 7. NANO EXCEL CORPORATION TLD., NO.308, BDA BUILDING NO.5, JANAKPURI, NEW DELHI-110 058, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, DR.HAREESH MADDINENI. 8. NANO EXCEL ENTERPRISES PVT.LTD., SOUTH INDIA HEAD OFFICE, NO.XXXII/204, UNICHIRA, OPPOSITE JUMA MASJID, INJIPARAMBU EDAPALLY TOLL, CHENGAPUZHA NAGAR POST, COCHIN-24, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, DR.HAREESH MADDINENI. 9. NANO EXCEL ENTERPRISES PVT.LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, TMC-36-828, GROUND FLOOR, HARWIN REGENCY, POLIYAM ROAD, THRISSUR-680 001, DISTRICT THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, DR.HAREESH MADDINENI. 10. NANO EXCEL ENTERPRISES PVT.LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, H.NO.95/1. SEVEN CROSS, NEAR GOVT.MODEL SCHOOL, DOMMULAR VILLAGE, BANGALORE-560 071, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, DR.HAREESH MADDINENI. 11. NANO POWER CORPORATION LTD., 1-98/9/7/H/1. 12-B-1, JAIHIND SOCIETY, MADHAPUR, HYDERABAD-500 081, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, DR.HAREESH MADDINENI. 12. DR.HAREESH MADDINENI, 145/C GROUND FLOOR, OPPOSITE SAI BABA TEMPLE, BENGAL RAO NAGAR, HYDERABAD-53038. BY ADDL. A.G. SRI.K.A. JALEEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2011, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 18867 OF 2011 AND CONNECTED CASES THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO. 18708/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE BROCHURE BROUGHT OUT BY THE 12TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE WRITE UPS IN THE LEADING DAILIES IN THE STATE. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ARTICLES THAT IS PUBLISHED PROMOTING THE ACTIVITIES OF THE 12TH RESPONDENT AND THE COMPANY CREATED BY HIM. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE BROCHURE BROUGHT OUT BY THE COMPANY WITH REGARD TO THE CLUB BINARY COMPENSATION PLAN AND ROYALITY CLUB PLAN. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE SAFETY NET PLAN BROUGHT OUT BY THE COMPANY. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE BROCHURE OF THE COMPANY SHOWING THE SIGNING OF THE MOU /TURE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. . PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------ W.P.(C).Nos. 18708/2011, 18867/2011, 18993/2011 , 19009/2011 & 19284 OF 2011 ------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Pius C.Kuriakose, J. The reliefs that are sought for in these writ petitions under Article 226 are identical to the reliefs which were sought for in W.P.(C) Nos.17410/2011,17592/2011 & 18116/2011 which was decided by another Division Bench of this court, to which one among us(PCK(J) was party. In fact, the allegations which are levelled by the petitioners in these writ petitions are homologous to the allegations which are levelled in those writ petitions. According to the petitioners, they are being harassed by the officials, who are respondents in these writ petitions, without any justifiable reason under the guise of investigating into the offences committed by the respondent companies and the Managing Director of those companies who is also arrayed as respondents. 2. Sri.Rajit learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(C) WPC.Nos.18708/2011 & others 2 Nos.18708/2011, 18867/2011, 18993/2011 and 19009/2011 addressed extensive submissions before us in support of these writ petitions and canvasing for the reliefs sought for in these writ petitions. Mr.Rajit submits that the petitioners are not guilty of the offences alleged whether it be under Sections 406 and 420 IPC or under Sections 4 and 5 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act 1978. 3. Sri.S.Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.19284/2011 addressed us separately. Apart from supporting the submissions of Mr.Rajit, Sri.Raj Kumar further submitted that all the petitioners in his writ petition are innocent villagers who only purchased the products manufactured and marketed by M/s. Nano Excel Corporation Ltd. and its subsidiary companies. In W.P.(C) No.19284/2011 the respondents are the officials of the Police Department only. 4. Sri.K.A.Jaleel, learned Additional Advocate General who appeared for the Police and the State in W.P.(C) Nos. 17410/2011,17592/2011 & 18116/2011 addressed submissions for those respondents in all these writ petitions. According to Mr.Jaleel, from the averments in the writ petitions, it is clear WPC.Nos.18708/2011 & others 3 that the petitioners are actually promoting the business of the respondents companies and the Managing Director of those respondents companies in the writ petitions filed by Adv. Rajit. Under the guise of multi level marketing of certain products what is being done by the petitioners is to promote money circulation which is banned under the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes(Banning) Act 1978. The learned Additional Advocate General submitted that as many as 23 cases have been registered in various police stations in Thrissur District itself on the basis of the complaints received from persons who were cheated due to the business conducted by the respondents companies. More than Rs.300/- crores have been collected from innocent villagers. The Additional Advocate General highlighted that the company respondents in Mr.Rajith's writ petitions are concentrating on villagers for promoting their business as the innocent illiterate villagers are vulnerable to cheating. The learned Additional Advocate General also referred to Crime No.69/2011 in which Vice President of the company is already arrested. The Additional Advocate General submitted that considering the magnitude of the cheating, the WPC.Nos.18708/2011 & others 4 Government has constituted a Special Investigating Team under the leadership of Additional DGP (Crimes) for investigating into the various crimes connected with the present scam. 5. By way of reply, Mr.Rajit as well as Mr.Raj Kumar submitted that the petitioners are not against the police investigating into the crimes. The petitioners apprehend that under the guise of investigation they will be arrested and detained in custody. 6. Response of the Additional Advocate General to the above submission of the counsel for the petitioners was that the police requires the attendance of the petitioners for questioning them in connection with the investigation into the crimes already registered. The Additional Advocate General submitted that, as assured during the hearing of W.P.(C) Nos. 17410/2011,17592/2011 & 18116/2011, notices as contemplated under Section 160 of the Cr.P.C. will be issued to the petitioners if their presence is required for questioning as witnesses. The Additional Advocate General also submitted that if, during the course of questioning, it is revealed that the petitioners are also guilty of the commission of cognizable offences, the police may WPC.Nos.18708/2011 & others 5 have to arrest them, in which case the provisions of Sections 41 (A) to (D) of the Code of Criminal Procedure will be followed to the extent applicable. According to the learned Additional Advocate General, there is absolutely no question of police harassment. The presence of the petitioners is required only in connection with the investigation into the crime already registered against the company respondents and the Managing Directors of the Company and some of the promoters of the business of the company respondents. 7. Having anxiously considered the submissions addressed at the Bar, we feel that these writ petitions can be disposed of more or less in the lines of W.P.(C) Nos. 17410/2011, 17592/2011 & 18116/2011. According to us, the allegation uniformly levelled by the petitioners that the police are harassing them without any justifiable reason is unfounded. We are convinced that the police at the moment only wants to question the petitioners in connection with the various crimes registered against the officials and the promoters of the money chain business and also in connection with the money chain scam in which the company respondents and the Managing Directors of WPC.Nos.18708/2011 & others 6 the company respondents are obviously involved. We record the submission of the Additional Advocate General that the police will issue notice to the petitioners as contemplated by Section 160 before requesting their attendance. We also record the Additional Advocate General's further submission that if it becomes necessary to arrest the petitioners, the procedure as provided in Section 41(A) to (D) of the Cr.P.C. and other provisions of law to the extent applicable will be adhered to strictly. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,JUDGE C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE dpk