the Madras High Court heard the matter relating to quashing of FIRs registered as against the former Union Minister and DMK MP Mr.Jegathrakshakan. During the course of arguments advanced by Senior counsel Mr.Manishankar on behalf of Mr.Jegathrakshakan, he stressed
Today, the Madras High Court heard the matter relating to quashing of FIRs registered as against the former Union Minister and DMK MP Mr.Jegathrakshakan. During the course of arguments advanced by Senior counsel Mr.Manishankar on behalf of Mr.Jegathrakshakan, he stressed upon a point that already several orders of this Hon’ble Court confirms the fact that the purchase of shares of Chrome Leather Company by Mr.Jegathrakshakan is legally valid. He further advanced the arguments that no criminal offences can be made out against Mr.Jegathrakshakan, who came into picture only in the year 1995 that too through legitimate process, on the other hand, the FIRs pointed a case of forgery happened in the year 1965. If that be so, how Mr.Jegathrakshakan is criminally liable for the events alleged took place in the year 1965. Though the State Public Prosecutor has complained that Mr.Jegathrakshakan and his family members are not co-operating with the investigation and they failed to respond to the summons. But, it has been seriously opposed by the Senior Counsel Mr.Manishankar that Mr.Jegathrakshakan and his wife were tested positive for Corona Virus and that is the reason why they have not appeared and he also relied upon the Interim order of the Division Bench of Madras High Court relating to the Enforcement Directorate matter in the same subject matter. After going through the order of Division Bench, the Court raised several questions to the State Public Prosecutor as to a) why they are expecting documents from Mr.Jegathrakshakan, b) why the prosecution has not collected the necessary documents from the Defacto Complainant, c) when such documents are public and statutory documents, why those documents have not been collected from the public Authorities and also observed that the Prosecution cannot compel the accused persons to produce documents. Further, the Court raised various questions to the counsel of defacto complainant, who lodged the complaints, a)why you have not filed any civil suit regarding title over the properties, b) when the High Court finds that you are the not legal heir of original owner Mrs.Ida L Chambers, how you maintain the Complaint without challenging the adverse orders passed against the defacto complainant and the Court prima facie opined that when Mr.Jegathrakshakan had come into picture only in the year 1995, how can be a charge u/s.420, 465 made against Mr.Jegathrakshakan, especially the prosecution alleges forgery committed by Mr.Nagappa Chettiar in the year 1965.
The Court has directed that Mr.Jegathrakshakan can nominate his son for production of only available documents to the CBCID upon receipt of summons and directed the Public Prosecutor to file his counter on 05-10-2020. The interim order of not to arrest has been extended till 05-10-2020