The second complaint was maintainable due to exceptional circumstances, and the civil court judgments were not conclusively binding on the criminal court.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 read with 401 Cr.P.C, to call for the records pertaining to the order dated 05.10.2021 in Cr.M.P.No.1825 of 2017 in C.C.No.29 of 2017 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pondicherry and set aside the same and discharge the petitioners from the above criminal proceedings.)

A. The Revision :

1. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Puducherry in Cr.M.P.No.1825 of 2017 in C.C.No.29 of 2017, in and by which the prayer of the petitioners / accused 1 and 2 to discharge them from the case, was refused by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, the present revision is filed.

B. The Facts :

2. Before adverting to the contentions raised in the discharge application and submissions made before this Court, it is necessary to narrate the facts of the case as the case has got checkered history and both sides, by their own conduct, have added enough liquid to the soil and are now finding themselves sinking in the field quicksand created by them and facts are thus:-

(i) On 10.09.2003, one Padma and Jaya, who had 2/5th share in the subject matter property, executed a Power of Attorney in favour of the first petitioner namely, Gurumoorthy. A perusal of the said Power of Attorney, it recites that the principals are not able to be personally present and carry out the necessary requirements and the power is given to manage the property including sale of the property and presenting documents for registration. However, the last sentence of the said Power of Attorney also reads that the Power of Attorney is irrevocable.

(ii) Thereafter, the said Padma and Jaya canceled the said Power of Attorney by a registered document dated 07.03.2006. It is also alleged that they have intimated the said cancellation to the first petitioner.

(iii) Thereafter, on 09.03.2006, the first petitioner / Gurumoorthy also filed O.S.No.349 of 2006 on the file of the learned Principal District Munsif, Puducherry, to declare the irrevocable power deed and Document No.1249 of 2003, dated 10.09.2003, is valid and for consequential permanent injunction restraining defendants 1 and 2 namely, the executors of the Power of Attorney Padma and Jaya from in any manner dispossesing the plaintiff out of the suit property except by due process of law and also for a permanent injunction restraining them from canceling the irrevocable power deed and for a further permanent injunction registering the District Registrar namely, the fourth defendant from registering the cancellation of power deed.

(iv) By four sale deeds executed by the daughters including the said Jeya and Padma, on 16.10.2006, in respect of their respective shares, the subject matter property came to be conveyed to one Abdul Kafoor, Abdullah, Sibuhathulla and the respondent/defacto complainant. More particularly, the share of the said Jeya and Padma was conveyed to the respondent/de-facto complainant.

(v) On 23.06.2008, the second petitioner approached the Lok Adalat by way of pre-litigation petition, under Section 19 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1985, as if the first petitioner executed the sale agreement on the strength of the Power of Attorney dated 10.09.2003, on 09.07.2005 and had agreed to sell the property for a total sale consideration of Rs.7,80,000/, and has already received a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- and, upon the said petition, the first petitioner being her husband, appeared before the Lok Adalat, submitted to the decree and consequentially an award was passed on 23.06.2008.

(vi) The learned Principal District Munsif, Puducherry was pleased to decree the suit in O.S.No.349 of 2006 on 29.10.2010.

(vii) On the strength of the said Lok Adalat award, a sale deed was also executed by the first petitioner in favour of the second petitioner by a sale deed dated 25.01.2011.

(viii) A suit for partition was filed among the sharers of the property including the above said Jaya and Padma