Madras HC pulls up cop, I-T official in Sukesh case

Chennai: The Madras high court has pulled up inspector, RS Puram police station, Coimbatore, and the income tax official for taking the a court in Coimbatore for a ride in a trial relating to seizure of Rolls Royce and three luxury cars from a conman Sukash Chandrashekaran, arrested for his involvement as a middleman in an alleged bribe scandal between Amma Makkal Munetra Kazhagam leader TTV Dhinakaran and the Election Commission of India to get AIADMK's 'Two Leaves' symbol in favour of TTV Dhinakaran's erstwhile faction.

During search operations in Tamil Nadu and Kerala, the I-T department seized the Rolls Royce and three luxury and motor cycle under section 132/133-A of income tax Act. All these vehicles were allegedly purchased by Sukesh, confined in Tihar Central Prison, through Karthikeyan alias Karthik and S. Balaji, who are dealers in used luxury cars. The vehicles were in the custody of his friends Navas and Noufal in Kochi and Ernakulam at Kerala.

While original car documents of the Rolls Royce were in the name Arvdind Ratilal Shaw, who also signed the transfer documents, the car and other car documents were in possession of Navas and Noufal. After the seizure Arvind Shaw filed a police complaint before RS Puram police station, Coimbatore, alleging that he gave car to Karthikeyan for showing it to the prospective buyer. And Karthikeyan neither paid the amount nor returned the car. On a petition from the police the Judicial Magistrate-I, Coimbatore,  ordered I-T department, Bengaluru, to produce the car before the court. Aggrieved over this the I-T department filed the present Criminal Original petition to quash trial court order.

When the matter came up for hearing before the court, Justice PN Prakash, aid “in the counter filed by the income tax department before the magistrate, it is shorn of even minimum particulars and this court strongly records its displeasure and the cavalier manner in which the counter has been filed by the income tax department before the judicial magistrate. The department must learn to respect the judiciary and should have placed all the facts before the judicial magistrate, in which case the order would not have been passed. The commissioner of the department is directed to take appropriate action against the officer who filed the counter in the case before the judicial magistrate- I Coimbatore.”

The judge also pulled up the inspector, RS Puram police station, for filing the petition before the JM, despite knowing that the income tax department had seized the car.  

The judge said “This is not a theft of property offence, where the property is essential. The allegation by Aravind Shaw is that Karthik had cheated him and had vanished with the car.” The question is whether Karthik had cheated Arvind or not for which the car is not an essential piece of evidence, especially when it came to the notice of the Inspector that the car had been seized by the IT department and it is in their lawful custody. Since the Inspector and the income tax department did not place the full facts before the trial court, the judicial magistrate passed the order.  Observing that it is open to Aravind R. Shaw to work out his remedy with the income tax department to take interim custody of the car the judge directed not use the services of the inspector to get custody of the car through the back door.