The completion of investigation and expert opinions provide sufficient grounds to proceed with the case, and issues raised by the petitioners should be decided during trial.

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed praying to quash the FIR in Crime No.14/2013, on the file of the District Crime Branch, Thoothukudi.

2. The short facts of the case are as follows :-

The defacto complainant one Kandasamy had given a complaint stating that the petitioner colluded themselves and created forged documents and sold the property of the defacto complainant, to an extent of 76 Acres 13 cents, to one T.Rajkumar and T.Ramkumar, by Document Nos. 814, 815 and 816 and in the sale deeds, the said Ramachandra Kumar and one Veda @ Vedanayagam were put their signatures, as witnesses and further the said Rajkumar and Ramkumar with the help of one Santheep Anand again sold the same to one Mala, in Document Nos.933/11 and 939/11. On knowing these fact, the defacto complainant had approached the Ramachandra Kumar and Bernat and asked about the same for that they promised to settle the sale consideration of Rs.1,42,18,000/-, but did not settle the amount, as promised. While the defacto complainant approached the petitioners and demanded to settle the above said sale consideration, they threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the 1st petitioner herein is engaged in the business of Real Estate under the name and style of 'Amba Farms Pvt. Ltd.' at Thoothukudi and the petitioners 2 and 3 are the brothers of 1st petitioner. The defacto complainant was working as an agent under the 1st petitioner, from March 2002 to November 2010 and purchasing the lands on behalf of the first petitioner Company and on account of his official duties, he was entrusted with huge amounts, for the purpose of purchasing the lands on behalf of the Company. The defacto complainant had misappropriated a sum of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- of the first petitioner Company so that the petitioner had terminated the service of the defacto complainant and directed him to execute the sale deeds in favour of the Petitioner Company in respect of the properties for which he had obtained General Power of Attorney, but the first accused was unable to render proper accounts and unable to execute the sale deeds even though he had received the sale consideration prior to the execution of General Power of Attorney from the real owners. Thereafter, the defacto complainant had sold the properties to the first and second petitioners and the sale deed was executed. In these circumstances, the defacto complainant had given an advertisement in the News Paper, 'Dinamalar' issue, dated 28.07.2011 suppressing the above sale, handing over of the documents and claiming the original General Power of Attorney, stating that the original title deeds were lost and also gave a complaint to the Tahsildar falsely stating that he has not executed the sale deed in favour of the petitioners 2 and 3. It is his further contention that the defacto complainant made the complaint before the respondent Police after a period one and half years ie., on 19.03.2013 and it clearly shows the falsity of the defacto complainant. In order to wreck vengeance against the petitioners, the present complaint has been lodged and therefore, he prayed to quash the FIR in Crime No.14/2013, on the file of the District Crime Branch, Thoothukudi.

4. It is his further contention that the defacto complainant on 04.08.2011 had given a declaration deed wherein he had stated about his employment with the first petitioner and had also given a declaration that the sale deed in Doc.Nos.814/2011, 815/2011 and 816/2011 and the power of attorney had been handed over to the first petitioner on 12.04.2011 and paper publication given by the defacto complainant on 28.07.2011 had been taken back. The sale deed executed on 12.04.2001 has been reaffirmed and he would take necessary steps for the revenue records to be changed in the name of subsequent purchasers. Further, a paper publication had been given by the first petitioner on 23.04.2013 abou