Madras High Court
Umaiyerupagam vs The State Rep. By on 31 March, 2022
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18957 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 31/03/2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18957 of 2018
and
Crl.MP(MD)Nos.8460 and 8461 of 2018
Umaiyerupagam : Petitioner/A6
Vs.
1.The State rep. By
The Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch,
Madurai.
(Crime No.2 of 2018) : R1/Complainant
2.N.S.Karthikeyan : R2/De-facto Complainant
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under
Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records in CC No.13 of
2018 on the file of the Special Court for Exclusive Trial
of Land Grabbing Cases, Madurai.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Sankara Pandian
For 1st Respondent : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy
Government Advocate
(Criminal side)
For 2nd Respondent : No appearance
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18957 of 2018
O R D E R
This criminal original petition is filed seeking
quashment of the case in CC No.13 of 2018 on the file of
the Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Land Grabbing
Cases, Madurai.
2.The case of the prosecution in brief:-
The well situated in Survey No.59/2 belongs to the
father of the de-facto complainant by way of purchase.
After the death of the father, the de-facto complainant got
the patta transferred in his name, on 17/08/2010. Based
upon which, entries were made in the revenue records.
Knowing well that the first accused has no right over the
property, he executed a settlement deed in favour of A2 and
A3, who are his sons. In the above said document, A4 and A5
signed as witnesses. The 6th accused was the document
writer. He created the above said settlement deed, knowing
fully well that the property belongs to the de-facto
complainant. So on the basis of the complaint given by the
de-facto complainant, a case was registered in Crime No.2
of 2018 for the offences under sections 420, 465, 468 and
471 IPC and after completing the formalities of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18957 of 2018
investigation, final report was filed and it was taken
cognizance in CC No.13 of 2018 by the trial court.
3.Seeking quashment of the same, this petition is
filed by the 6th accused.
4.Heard both sides.
5.The petitioner is the scribe of the disputed
document. From the preamble portion as well as from the
case of the parties, it is the case of the de-facto
complainant that his junior paternal uncle by name Ganesan,
the first accused has no right over the property in respect
of which, the disputed settlement deed has been executed by
him in favour of one Muthukumar and Senthil Kumar.
6.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
would submit that there was an unregistered partition deed
between the father of the de-facto complainant namely
Selvaraj and his junior paternal uncle Ganesan, in which
the well situated in Survey No.111/2 was allotted in the
name of both the brothers. According to the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner, since common right has been
granted in favour of the first accused, he has executed a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18957 of 2018
settlement deed only in favour of 1/4th share in the above
said common well. It is not a fraudulent document. But
however, this plea cannot be raised by this petitioner,
since he happened to be only a scribe. The reason being
that survey number mentioned in the unregistered partition
deed is different from one that has been mentioned in the
settlement deed. So in the settlement deed, the survey
number is mentioned as 59/2, whereas as mentioned earlier,
survey number in the unregistered partition deed is
mentioned as 111/2. Whether subsequent to the above said
unregistered partition deed, there was change in survey
number, no document is available. But in respect of the
property situated in survey No.59/3B, which is shown as 1st
item in the disputed settlement deed, standing in the name
of A1. But in respect of the 1st item, the de-facto
complainant has not claimed any right.
7.Now Whatever it may be the position, considering the
limited role that alleged to have been played by the
petitioner, the offences under sections 420, 465, 468 and
427 IPC may not get attracted against this petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18957 of 2018
8.As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Mohammed Ibrahim Vs. State of Bihar and
another [(2009)8 SCC 751], if the first accused did not
have any right over the property and in spite of that,
executed a settlement deed in favour of his child alone.
The affected persons are only the child and the de-facto
complainant. But the right of the de-facto complainant may
not be affected in such sort of the settlement deed.
9.Whether any criminality can be attached or not is a
matter for consideration during the course of trial. So I
am not expressing any view with regard to the legality of
the disputed document. Suffice to say that this petitioner
being a scribe, at no stretch of imagination, in the
absence of allegation that he also conspired with the co-
accused in executing a settlement deed, the offences under
sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 IPC may not be attracted
against him. So on that ground, this petition is liable to
be allowed.
10.In the result, this criminal original petition is
allowed. The impugned CC No.13 of 2018 on the file of the
Special Court for Exclusive trial of Land Grabbing Cases,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18957 of 2018
Madurai, is hereby quashed as against this petitioner
alone. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are
closed.
31/03/2021
Internet:Yes/No
Index:Yes/No
er
Note: In view of the
present lock down owing
to COVID-19 pandemic, a
web copy of the order may
be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring
that the copy of the
order that is presented
is the correct copy,
shall be the
responsibility of the
advocate/litigant
concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18957 of 2018
G.ILANGOVAN,J.,
er
To,
1.The Special Court for
Exclusive trial of Land Grabbing Cases,
Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch,
Madurai.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.18957 of 2018
31/03/2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
