Madras High Court
Ramu @ Ramadoss vs State By on 9 April, 2021
Crl.O.P.No.1992 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
Crl.O.P.No.1992 of 2018
1. Ramu @ Ramadoss
2. K.Devaraj
3. K.Elumalai
4. K.Dhaxnamoorthy
5. Padmavathi
6. Adhilakshmi ...Petitioners
Vs.
1. State By:
Sub Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch Police,
Kancheepuram District.
(Crime No.18 of 2014)
2.Vijayakumari ...Respondents
Prayer: The Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.,
to call for the records pertaining the charge sheet in C.C.No.156 of 2017
pending before the Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Chengalpattu,
Kancheepuram District and to quash the same.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.1992 of 2018
For Petitioners : Mr.L.Ramu
For R1 : Mr.T.Shanmugarajeswaran
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
For R2 : Mr.B.R.Shankaralingam
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking call for the
records pertaining the charge sheet in C.C.No.156 of 2017 pending before
the Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Chengalpattu, Kancheepuram
District and to quash the same.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant had
purchased a property vide registered Document No.11/1999 from one
Vijayakumar Reddy power of attorney of A7/Dhanammal and subsequently,
the defacto complainant purchased a another property vide registered
Document No.1501/2004 from one Ponvasanthakumar another power agent
of A7/Dhanammal. Thereafter, the said A7/Dhanammal and other
petitioners 2 to 6 have executed a release deed in favour of the 1st petitioner
for which, the defacto complainant alleged a complaint before the law
enforcing agency against the petitioners stating that her property was
fraudulently encumbered and in order to grab money from the defacto
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.1992 of 2018
complainant. Challenging the same, the present petition has been filed
before this Court.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the dispute
between the parties are purely civil in nature and without going into the
merits of the case, it would be suffice, if this Court issues a direction to the
Trial Court to expedite the trial and complete the same as early as possible.
He would further submit that the appearance of the petitioners before the
Trial Court may be dispensed with and would further submit that the
petitioners are ready to appear as and when necessary arises.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the
dispute is purely civil in nature and the question has to be decided only by
the competent Court and the prima facie case is made out and admittedly
A7/Dhanammal had sold the property through her power agent, the defacto
complainant purchased the property from the power agent of
A7/Dhanammal. Subsequently, A7/Dhanammal executed a release deed in
favour of the 1st petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.1992 of 2018
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.
6.In view of the above, I am not inclined to interfere with the
proceedings in C.C.No.156 of 2017 pending before the Judicial Magistrate
No.II, Chengalpattu, Kancheepuram District and the Court below to
expedite the trial in C.C.No.156 of 2017 and complete the same within a
period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The
appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court is dispensed with.
However, this order will not stand on the way of the Trial Court to insist for
the appearance of the petitioners for receiving copies under Section 207 of
Cr.P.C., framing of charges, questioning under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and
judgment and as and when the Trial Court feels it necessary.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
09.04.2021
msrm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.1992 of 2018
To
1.The learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.II,
Chengalpattu, Kancheepuram District.
2. The Sub Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch Police,
Kancheepuram District.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras,
Chennai 600 104.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.No.1992 of 2018
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
msrm
Crl.O.P.No.1992 of 2018
09.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
