The central legal point established in the judgment is that the allegations appeared to be purely civil in nature and lacked elements of criminal offenses.

Challenging the correctness of the final report filed by the Investigating Officer in Crime No.59 of 2010, A.3 and A.4 have filed the petition in Crl.O.P.No.19348 of 2010 seeking to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.238 of 2010 pending on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore, while A.1 and A.2 have filed the petition in Crl.O.P.No.20260 of 2010 seeking for similar prayer.

2. The first accused-land owner and pending this Criminal Original Petition, he died. The second accused is the power of attorney holder of A.1. Accused Nos.3 and 4 are the purchasers while the de facto complainant is the Agreement Holder.

3. The brief facts, which are necessary for determination of the cases, are as follows:-

[i] The second respondent herein/de facto complainant has filed a private complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Chidambaram under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. for the offences under Sections 120-B, 420 and 109 of IPC and Section 3 (2) (V) and 3 (2) (ii) of SC & ST Act, 1989. The learned Judicial Magistrate, referred the same to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Kumaratchi Police Station, for investigation. The Sub Inspector of Police has registered an FIR on 20.04.2010 in Crime No.59 of 2010 for the offences under Sections 420, 120-B and 109 of IPC and Section 3 (2) (V) and 3 (2) (ii) of SC & ST Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred as Special Act) and transferred the investigation to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sethiathope, as he was the competent officer under the Special Act to investigate into the same.

[ii] The first respondent herein, after investigation, has filed a final report before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Chidambaram on 20.04.2010 for the offences under Sections 420 r/w. 34 & 109 of IPC and Section 3 (1) (5) of SC & ST Act, 1989. The allegation in the charge sheet is that A.1 and A.2 belong to Vellallar Community. A.3 and A.4 belong to Adi Dravida Community. The second respondent/de facto complainant was cultivating 4.80 acres of the lands belonging to the first accused. The second respondent/defacto-complainant wanted to purchase 66 cents of land from the land owner/first accused and the first accused also agreed for the same and received a sum of Rs.16,500/- and entered into a sale agreement with the wife of second respondent. A.2 represented to the defacto complainant that he is power agent of A1 and promised to sell another 4 acres and 14 cents and on 19.12.2001, A.2 in the capacity of Power Agent of A.1 received a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and gave a hand receipt to the said amount. It is also the further case that A.2 received Rs.30,000/- in three instalments and totally, A.2 had received Rs.1,30,000/- and A.1 had received Rs.16,500/-. A.1 and A.2, with an intention to cheat the second respondent herein/de facto complainant and knowing the fact that the de facto complainant is a Adi Dravida, all the accused had entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat the de facto complainant and A.1 and A.2 had executed a Sale Deed in favour of A.3 and A.4 for a sum of Rs.1,46,500/- and thus, A.1 and A.2 had committed the offence under Section 420 r/w. 34 of IPC and Section 3 (1) (5) of SC & ST Act, 1989 and A.3 and A.4 had committed the offence under Section 420 r/w. 109 IPC. The final report filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Chidambaram, was taken on file as PRC No.5 of 2010 and the same was committed to the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore and taken on file as S.C.No.238 of 2010.

4. The short points that need to be addressed in both the cases are whether there is any abuse of process of Court by the de facto complainant.

5. The case of the de facto complainant is that he belongs to Adi Dravida Community which is notified as a Scheduled Caste community and A.1 and A.2 are not the members of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe community and A.1 has entered into an agreement of sale on 25.04.1998 and received part of the sale considerati