Madras High Court
S.Sasi Kumar vs State Represented By Its on 13 December, 2021
Crl.R.C.No.857 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 13.12.2021.
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
Crl.R.C.No.857 of 2021
S.Sasi Kumar ... Petitioner
vs.
State represented by its,
The Inspector of Police,
A-4 Red hills Police Station,
Chennai. ... Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of
Criminal Procedure Code, to set aside the order in C.M.P.No.5008 of 2021
on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Ponneri dated
18.10.2021 and consequently, direct the respondent herein to register the
FIR.
For Petitioner : Mr. S.Suresh
For Respondent : Mr.S.Sugendran
Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The Criminal Revision has been filed against the order dated
18.10.2021, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Ponneri,
dismissing the petition in C.M.P.No.5008 of 2021, filed under Section
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.857 of 2021
156(3) Cr.P.C., seeking a direction to the Inspector of Police, M4 Red Hills
Police Station to register an FIR based on the complaint dated 20.03.2020.
2. The submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
is as under :-
(a) The petitioner is the Manager of M/s. VKB Enterprises
Private Limited and when he intended to purchase a land for his business,
one Pramod Kumar Bhalottia, claiming himself to be the owner of the
properties in (i) Survey No.138/3, measuring 35 cents, (ii) Survey
No.139/4B, measuring 17 cents and (iii) Survey No.139/6, measuring 22
cents, totalling to 74 cents, situated at No.5, New No.28, Ariyalur group,
Theeyampakkam Village, Ambattur Taluk, Thiruvallur District, having
purchased the property from one M.S.Shanmugam and M.S.Palanivelu
through their Power Agent P.Kumaran vide Document No.5815 of 2005 on
03.11.2005 registered at SRO Redhills, has approached the petitioner.
(b) Believing the representation made by the said Pramod
Kumar Bhalottia, the petitioner's company had purchased the property vide
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.857 of 2021
Document No.13168 of 2011 dated 21.11.2011, registered at SRO Redhills
after paying the consideration of Rs.32,26,400/- and the amount was paid
through Cheque bearing No.000024, dated 22.07.2011. The said Pramod
Kumar Bhalottia had claimed that he was the absolute owner of the property
and that the property is free from any encumbrance and on believing his
words the petitioner's company had parted with the entire amount. During
the year 2019, the petitioner's company intended to put up the godown in the
lands and when they had attempted to conduct boomi pooja, they were
prevented by some persons in the locality and on enquiry the petitioner was
shocked to know that one Thanigachalam had already filed a suit in
O.S.No.161 of 2006 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thiruvottiyur
against the said Pramod Kumar Bhalottia and his predecessors in title,
seeking a declaration that the sale deed dated 03.11.2005, in favour of the
said Pramod Kumar Bhalottia is not valid one and binding the said
Thanigachalam and the learned District Munsif, by order dated 03.02.2011
had declared the earlier sale deed as null and void.
(c) Though the said Pramod Kumar Bhalottia was a party to the
suit and he was aware of the order passed by the Civil Court, suppressing
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.857 of 2021
that fact, he had claimed himself to be the owner of the property and sold
the same to the petitioner's company on 21.11.2011.
(d) It is thus clear that a fraud has been played against the
petitioner's company by the said Pramod Kumar Bhalottia and aggrieved
against the same, the petitioner had given a complaint to the respondent
police on 16.03.2020, but the respondent, for the reasons best known to
them, refused to receive the complaint and thereafter, the petitioner had
given an online complaint to the Commissioner of Police, Chennai on
20.03.2020. The petitioner was given an acknowledgment bearing
No.EUS20033813. The complaint was forwarded to the Deputy
Commissioner of Police, Madhavaram and subsequently it was forwarded to
the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Puzhal on 09.07.2020 and thereafter,
no action has been taken by the Assistant Commissioner of Police.
(e) Therefore, the petitioner had approached the learned
Judicial Magistrate No.II, Ponneri by filing a petition in C.M.P.No.5008 of
2021, under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C to direct the respondent to register an
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.857 of 2021
FIR, however, the learned Magistrate No.II, Ponneri, on erroneous ground,
stating that the dispute is of civil in nature, dismissed the petition vide order
dated 18.10.2021.
(f) The said Pramod Kumar Bhalottia was fully aware that the
property does not belong to him, however he induced the petitioner by
claiming himself to be the owner of the property and had cheated the
petitioner and the petitioner had parted with the huge amount of
Rs.32,26,400/- and therefore, a clear case of fraud has been made out,
whereas, the Judicial Magistrate No.II, dismissed the petition.
3. Mr.S.Sugendran, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
appearing for the respondent would submit that since the petitioner did not
cooperate for the investigation, no further action has been taken.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.857 of 2021
5. On perusal of the materials available on record, this Court finds
that it is a clear case of fraud. The said Pramod Kumar Bhalottia, being a
party to the suit filed by one Thanigachalam and being aware of the
judgment and decree against himself, had claimed to be the absolute owner
of the property and sold the same to the petitioner and thereby cheated him
to the tune of Rs.32,26,400/-. Therefore, a prima facie case is made out to
register an FIR and investigation of the same.
6. In view of the above order dated 18.10.2021 in C.M.P.No.5008 of
2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Ponneri is set aside
and the respondent is directed to register a case, complete the investigation
and file the final report within a period of four months from the date of
receipt of a copy of the order.
7. The Criminal Revision Case is, accordingly, disposed of.
13.12.2021
Index: Yes/No.
Internet: Yes/No.
ham
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.857 of 2021
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II,
Ponneri.
2.The Inspector of Police,
A-4 Red hills Police Station,
Chennai.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.857 of 2021
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
ham
Crl.R.C.No.857 of 2021
13.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
