SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(Mad) 801

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S. Palanivelu, J.
Santha Soruban
Versus
State rep by the Inspector of Police, Kodaikanal Police Station,
Crl. R.C. (MD) No. 434 of 2010 and M.P. No. 1 of 2010
Decided on : 15 February 2012

ADVOCATES APPEARED:
B. Kumar Senior Counsel for A.V. Arumugam, for Petitioner
P. Kandasamy, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for C. Vakeeswaran for Respondents

Headnote:CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 - SECTION 239 - Discharge of accused - Allegation that accused with other relatives fraudulently transferred patta in their names - Respondent police filed charge sheet against them - Petitioner filed a petition for discharge from the case but lower court dismissed petition - Hence forward for revision - Held, bearing in mind the principles laid down by Supreme Court, the court considered view that sufficient materials are available in allegations in complaints and statement of witnesses which are prima facie and there is no circumstance made out to discharge petitioner - Even if dispute appears to be of civil nature, when it is contains ingredients of criminal offences, criminal complaint can be entertained - Court considered that sufficient materials are available as far as accused, hence he is not entitled to get discharge from case. Mohammed Ibrahim v. State of Bihar 2009 (3) SCC (Crl) 929 - relied upon.

       Result : Criminal Revision Case dismissed.

ORDER

1.1 The petitioner is 4th accused in Cr. No. 342 of 2007 on the file of the Kodaikanal Police Station. One Unnikrishnan has lodged the complaint, who is Power of Attorney for 11 persons who are legal heirs of P. Gerald Walter and his wife Ms. Teresa G. Walter. In the complaint he has alleged that Ms. Theresa G. Walter had purchased the properties on 22.12.1959 in T.S. Nos. 62, 64 and 65. She was in possession of 8.50 acres in T.S. No. 67/1, which are situate in Vilpatti Village, Kodaikanal Taluk, Dindigul District. She appointed her son H.J. Walter as Power Agent who executed 3 sale deeds on 5.8.1987, 10 cents in S.F. No. 686/2 and New T.S. No. 65 with a right of pathway through T.S. No. 70 was sold to this petitioner. The father of the petitioner purchased 25 cents in T.S. No. 66. Another 25 cents was sold to one Jagadeesan in T.S. No. 66. On the strength of Power of Attorney given by his mother, H.J. Walter, on 17.3.1987, sold 61 cents in T.S. No. 62 to Santha Shobana.

1.2 All the remaining properties were in possession of Ms. Teresa G. Walter. The father of the petitioner by name Santha Gunam was very much attached to Ms. Teresa G. Walter. On 21.5.1991 she executed a Will bequeathing all her properties to all her 11 children. After her death they became absolute owners of the properties. No partition was effected between them. The family members of Santha Gunam conspired together with an intention to create documents and records over the properties entrusted to them in good faith. They transferred the patta in their names by fraudulent means with the help of revenue officials by furnishing forged documents and details for the properties belonging to the heirs of Ms.Teresa G. Walter. Saraswathi wife of Santha Gunam based on the patta, fraudulently transferred the title in her name and mortgaged the property in T.S. No. 70 with the Kodaikanal Co-operative Urban Bank Limited for Rs. 4,90,000/- on 11.3.2002. The other accused also have indulged in the criminal activities of fabricating the records with respect to the properties belonging to Mrs.Teresa G. Walter. Following is the rank of the accused in F.I.R.

1. Santha Gunam (died)

2. Saraswathi Santha Gunam

3. Satish

4. Santha Sobana

5. Santha Soruban

6. Jagadeesan

7. Thangamayan

8. Kuppusamy

9. N. Serman

10. S. Rajrathinam

1.3 The respondent police filed charge sheet after investigation against the accused under Sections 420 , 406 , 465, 467, 4678, 471, 474 read with 120(B) I.P.C. The case has been taken on file in C.C. No. 12 of 2008 by the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Kodaikanal.

2. Pending the hearing, the petitioner filed an application under Section 239 Cr.P.C, for discharge from the case, in which he has alleged the following:

2.1 The transactions are completely civil in nature and the contemporaneous documentary evidence clearly shows that it is civil transaction. There is no iota of material in getting petitioner and his family members into the commission of offence. The de facto complainant has no locus standi to set the criminal law in motion. The legal heirs of Ms. Teresa G. Walter alone are the competent persons to question the validity of documents in possession of the accused. The Power of Attorney would not make the holder to lay complaint. He may not have sufficient knowledge. He has called in question the transactions took place between the year 2001 and 2002 and the power of attorney was given to him only in 2007 and hence he has no personal knowledge of the transactions.

2.2 The petitioner is neither a party in anyone of the transactions nor any overt act attributed against him touching the penal provisions in the charge. Hence, compelling him to face the order of trial would not arise. When there is no sufficient ground to proceed further, the Judicial Magistrate has to discharge him. The petitioner claims lawful title over the properties in question. The allegation whether the legal heirs of T.G. Walter were deceived can only be found after exami
































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top