The relevance of civil proceedings in a criminal case and the need for independent determination of the validity and genuineness of documents in civil proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer : Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., against the judgment of acquittal passed in C.A.No.290 of 2003 dated 25.08.2004 on the file of the Learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai in reversing the judgment of conviction and sentence passed in C.C.No.242 of 2003 dated 22.09.2003 on the file of the Learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, for offences under Sections 120-B of IPC, 420 r/w 120-B of IPC in so far as the respondents 1 to 8 are concerned and prays for setting aside the judgment of the acquittal made in C.A.No.290 of 2003 dated 25.08.2004 on the file of the Learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai and remand the said Criminal Appeal No.290 of 2003 to the Court of Sessions, Chennai, to deal with the case in accordance with the law.)

Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the order of acquittal passed by the Lower Appellate Court in C.A.No.290 of 2003 dated 25.08.2004 on the file of the Learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai by reversing the Judgment dated 22.09.2003 in C.C.No.242 of 2003 on the file of XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai and convict the accused as charged.)

1. The set of Criminal Revision and Criminal appeal arising out of order of acquittal by the Lower Appellate Court in C.A.No.290 of 2003 on the file of Learned III Additional Sessions Court, Chennai.

2. The brief fact of the case leading to the batch of Criminal Revision and Appeal before this Court are capsulized as below:-

This case centres around 90 grounds of land at R.S.No.2024, Block No.41, Arundale Street, Mylapore, Chennai, alleged to be land dedicated for the maintenance of the male descendants of Sha Abdul Kuadir Fakhri and for the maintenance of mosque. On 27.08.1988, the descendants of Sha Abdul Kuadir Fakhri, who are entitled for 2/3rd of the income from the said land, appointed one Thiru.Kamaluddin Fakhri as their Power of Attorney. The descendants of Sha Abdul Kuadir Fakhri (11 in numbers) through their Power of Attorney S.M.Kamaluddin Fakhri entered into a Memorandum of Agreement with P.M.Arumuga Chettiar and Gokul Construction represented by K.Balasigamani for Joint Venture Property Development Project on 31.08.1989. A supplementary agreement dated 31.08.1990 was entered in view of the death of P.M.Arumuga Chettiar. As per the supplementary agreement, the principals has to execute the power of attorney in favour of K.Balasigamani to sell 60% of the undivided share of the land and 40% of the completed construction to the principal within 3 years and remaining construction and undivided share of 40% in the land shall be vest with the Gokul Construction.

3. Alleging that, K.Balasigamani of Gokul Construction and his Associates breached the joint ventured agreement by entering into a criminal conspiracy. In order to cheat the principals Balasigamani had conveyed the property to his family members through 9 different sale deeds using the Power of Attorney given for purpose of the joint venture development. Out of 9 different sale deeds, 8 for the 33 grounds and 1 sale deed is in favour of Power of Attorney himself, would expose the fraudulent intention claiming that accused 2 to 9 who are wife, son, daughter and other family members of K.Balasigamani. Fictitious sales deeds were created assigning fictitious sub-divisions and survey numbers. Sale agreement dated 31.08.1989 had been fabricated as if, the land owners i.e., the descendant of Sha Abdul Kuadir Fakhri have executed sale agreements. The subsequently transaction by way of sale deeds been created on the strength of the power of attorney deed thereby the owners of the land had been cheated and put to wrongful loss. With these averments, the private complaint was filed under Section 156(3