WP Crl. No. 1989 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN WP Crl. No. 1989 of 2026 R.Raja S/o. Raju, Vasantha Saw Mill, Opposite to Aruthra School, Neduvasal Road, Perambalur. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State Rep. by The Superintendent of Police Economics Offences Wing (EOW), 1st Floor, Readymade Garment Complex, Sidco-Old Corporate Buildings, Thiru. Vi. Ka. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai 600 032. 2. The State Rep. by, The Inspector of Police Sidco-Old Corporate Buildings, Thiru.Vi. Ka. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032. 3. M/s. Thiripura Chits (P) Ltd., Rep. by its Manager, Office at No. 170D, 3rd Floor, N.S.R Complex, Trichy Main Road, Perambalur – 621 212. Also having its Corporate Office at No.36, 2nd Floor, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 015. ..Respondent(s) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP Crl. No. 1989 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 6 Prayer: The Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 20-6-2026 and consequently direct the respondents to cancel the Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deed by issuing a receipt and direct the 3rd respondent’s company to execute the necessary deeds in favour of the petitioner within a time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner(s): Mr.G.Ilamurugu Assisted by Ms.R.Ishwarya For Respondent(s): Mr.Arun Anbumani, Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 and R2 ORDER Heard Mr.G.Ilamurugu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Arun Anbumani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for R1 and R2. 2. The petitioner had mortgaged his property with the 3rd respondent. He had availed a loan for a sum of Rs.15,00,000/-. He claims to have repaid the entire amount and also obtained a certificate from the 3rd respondent as early as on 13.05.2017 that the amount payable from the petitioner to the 3rd respondent is NIL. The cause of action for the writ petition is that the 3rd respondent was the subject matter of investigation for the offences attracting the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositor (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997. In the meantime, on account of the investigation, the 3rd respondent wound up its operations. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP Crl. No. 1989 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 6 3. The petitioner alleged that, as he has no due certificate from the 3rd respondent, it is the duty of the respondents No.1 and 2 to return the original title deeds, which had been deposited in favour of the 3rd respondent on 03.03.2015. As it had not been done, the petitioner gave a representation on 20.06.2026 and since it has not been considered, he is before this Court. 4. When the matter came up yesterday, I called upon Mr.Arun Anbumani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, to receive instructions from respondents No.1 and 2 as to whether they are in possession of the title deeds relating to the property of the petitioner. He reported in the negative. Hence, I called upon the Investigation Officer to go on record by way of an affidavit. 5. Today, an affidavit has been produced by Mr.Arun Anbumani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. The affidavit filed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing, states as follows: “5.I further submit that the MoD document referred to by the petitioner in the present writ petition was neither seized nor recovered by the then Investigating Officer during the course of the said search and seizure. The said document does not form part of the documents seized in the criminal case. Therefore, the allegation that the said document is in the custody or possession of the police is wholly incorrect and is specifically denied.” https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP Crl. No. 1989 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 6 6. As the respondents No. 1 and 2 are not in possession of the title deeds of the petitioner, the relief that the petitioner seeks cannot be granted. It is for the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Court and seek and obtain a decree for return of documents against the 3rd respondent and for cancellation of MoD. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. 13-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No smv https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP Crl. No. 1989 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 6 To, 1.The Superintendent of Police Economics Offences Wing (EOW), 1st Floor, Readymade Garment Complex, Sidco-Old Corporate Buildings, Thiru. Vi. Ka. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai 600 032. 2.The Inspector of Police Sidco-Old Corporate Buildings, Thiru.Vi. Ka. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 4.The Manager, M/s. Thiripura Chits (P) Ltd., Office at No. 170D, 3rd Floor, N.S.R Complex, Trichy Main Road, Perambalur – 621 212. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP Crl. No. 1989 of 2026 __________ Page6 of 6 V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J. smv WP Crl. No. 1989 of 2026 13-08-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis