Justice P N Prakash stated this while allowing petitions filed by V Sundaram and Mallika charged with cheating the public by failing to give attractive returns as promised from a chit firm they had founded in Kancheepuram.
In this regard, the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Kancheepuram) had written to the Sub-Registrar there not to register their properties.
The judge said the DSP's act was an arbitary exercise of power and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution (equality before law).
"The police officer can at the most submit a report to the state government or central government requesting the state government to initiate action under the Ordinance and he cannot arrogate to himself the power to issue such veiled threats to the Sub-Registrar."
Police completed investigation and filed final report before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chengelpet, which was taken on file and the trial is pending.
After doing so, the DSP (Economic Offences Wing), Kancheepuram, the Investigating Officer, wrote to the Sub Registrar of the town on January 8, 2015 on the encumberance.
The two accused then moved the court.
The Judge concurred with submissions of the Court- appointed Amicus Curaie Abudu Kumar Rajarathinam and said the Criminal Law Amendment Act introduced by Tamil Nadu government in 1997 empowers the state or central government to initiate proceedings even in respect of properties of private persons. The police officer has no role in this.
The Judge then set aside the order passed by the DSP to the Sub Registrar.
