Madras High Court
Manjunathan vs State Rep. By on 29 March, 2023
Crl.O.P.No.32104 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.03.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
Crl.O.P.No.32104 of 2019
and
Crl.M.P.Nos.17636 & 17638 of 2019
1.Manjunathan
2.K.T.Kalaiselvi ... Petitioners
Vs.
1. State Rep. by
Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch,
Erode District,
(CR.No.9/2014)
2.Narmatha, V. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the
Criminal Procedure Code seeking to call for the records pertaining to
C.C.No.875/2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Erode
and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.B.Kumarasamy for
M/s.P.Kalaimuthu
For Respondents : Mr.A.Damodaran (Additional
Public Proctor) [R.1]
: Mr.John Sathya (Sr.Advocate) for
Mr.M.Roshan Atiq [for R.2]
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.32104 of 2019
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the final report
filed for the offence under Section 420 IPC read with Section 109 IPC.
2. It is alleged in the final report that on 01.01.2013, the petitioners
entered into a sale agreement with the de facto complainant agreeing to sell
the lands measuring 5043sq.ft. and 1935 sq.ft. to construct a building over
the said land for a total sale consideration of Rs.95,00,000/-; that on the date
of agreement, the de facto complainant paid Rs.40,00,000/- as advance; that
the petitioners on 09.01.2013, executed a registered sale agreement in
favour of one Kandasamy in respect of 1935 sq.ft. of land which was agreed
to be sold to the de facto complainant; that on 19.06.2013, the de facto
complainant made another payment of Rs.40,00,000/-; that on 15.07.2013,
the petitioners executed a sale agreement in respect of 5043 Sq.ft. of land in
favour of A.3; that on 18.10.2013, the sale agreement was cancelled and a
sale deed was executed in favour of A.4. Thus, the petitioners were accused
of offences under Section 420 IPC read with Section 109 IPC.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.32104 of 2019
agreement dated 01.01.2013 said to have been executed between the 1 st
petitioner and the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant is a fabricated
document prepared by misusing the blank papers taken from the petitioners.
The petitioners never agreed to sell their property to the de facto
complainant. Likewise, he would submit that the receipt evidence in the
payment of Rs.40,00,000/- on 19.06.2013 is also fabricated by the de facto
complainant by misusing the blank papers obtained from the petitioners.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners therefore submitted that
even assuming that the entire allegations were proved, the de facto
complainant ought to have filed a suit for specific performance. The dispute
of a civil nature has been given colour of criminal offence. In this regard the
learned counsel relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in
Vijay Kumar Ghai and Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors passed in
S.L.P (Crl.) No.10951 of 2019.
5. The learned Senior counsel for the 2nd respondent would submit
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.32104 of 2019
that this is not a case of a civil transaction and the allegations constitute the
offences alleged. The intention of the petitioners to deceive the de facto
complainant is evidenced from the fact that on 01.01.2013, the petitioners
received Rs.40,00,000/- and on 09.01.2013 they had executed a sale
agreement in favour of one Kandasamy in respect of 1935 Sq.Ft of land.
Further, without disclosing the sale agreement they had obtained another
sum of Rs.40,00,000/- on 19.06.2013. Thereafter, they had executed a sale
agreement in favour of A.3 (sister of A.1). Thereafter, this sale agreement
was cancelled and a sale deed was executed in favour of A.4 who is also a
close relative of A.3. All these circumstances would show that the petitioners
had dishonestly induced the de facto complainant to part with
Rs.80,00,000/-.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor reiterated the
submissions of the learned senior counsel and prayed for the dismissal of the
quash petition.
7. This Court finds that the transaction alleged in the impugned final
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.32104 of 2019
report prima facie discloses the offence of 420 IPC. The allegation reveals
that the petitioners had received Rs.40,00,000/- on 01.01.2013, and had
executed a sale agreement on the same day. Within eight days the petitioners
had executed a sale agreement in favour of third party in respect of a portion
of the land. That apart, another sum was received by the petitioners on
19.06.2013 for the 2nd respondent. Thereafter, they had executed a sale
deed in favour of the 4th accused who happens to be a close relative. All the
above facts prima facie disclose the offence of 420 IPC. Hence, this Court is
not inclined to quash the final report. The petitioners' contention is that the
agreement dated 01.01.2013 and the subsequent receipt on 19.06.2013 were
taken on blank papers and misused by the de facto complainant cannot be
decided in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Those issues have to be
adjudicated only before the Trial Court.
8. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this quash petition.
However, the petitioners are at liberty to raise all their contentions before the
Trial Court. The Trial Court shall independently consider the evidence
adduced before it without being influenced by any of the observations made
in this order. The appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.32104 of 2019
dispensed with unless the learned Judicial Magistrate deems their presence
necessary for the progress of the Trial.
9. With these observations, the Criminal Original Petition stands
dismissed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
29.03.2023
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Neutral Citation :Yes/No
shr
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
District Crime Branch,
Erode District.
2. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Erode.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.32104 of 2019
SUNDER MOHAN. J,
shr
Crl.O.P.No.32104 of 2019
and
Crl.M.P. Nos.17636 & 17638 of 2019
29.03.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
