HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.N. MANJULA, J.
N. Arumuga Gounder & Others - Appellants
Versus
The State, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Coimbatore & Another - Respondents
Crl.O.P.Nos.10612, 4353 & 4903 of 2021 & Crl.M.P.Nos.2785 & 3132 of 2021 & 19505 & 19506 of 2022
Decided On : 20-03-2023
Criminal Original Petitions - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - Sections 420, 120B, 423, 465, 471, 467 of IPC - The court found sufficient evidence to frame charges against the accused and conduct a trial based on the relationship between the accused, execution of sale agreements, and timing of legal notices.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, accused 1 to 3, sought to quash criminal proceedings against them related to the sale of properties. The prosecution alleged that the accused misused power of attorney, created false sale agreements, and misappropriated sale proceeds.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was sufficient evidence to proceed with the trial, as the relationship between the accused, execution of sale agreements, and timing of legal notices indicated potential criminal intent.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the misuse of power of attorney, creation of false sale agreements, misappropriation of sale proceeds, and the timing of legal notices in relation to the alleged criminal activities.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the presence of sufficient evidence to establish potential criminal intent, as indicated by the actions and relationships of the accused, leading to the framing of charges and continuation of the trial.
Final Decision: The Criminal Original Petitions seeking to quash the proceedings were dismissed, and the trial was directed to proceed expeditiously.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, praying to call for the records in FR.No.31 of 2017 in C.C.No.46 of 2020 dated 25.05.2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Pollachi and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and without jurisdiction.)
Common Order:
These Criminal Original Petitions have been preferred to call for the records pertaining to C.C.No.46 of 2020 dated 25.05.2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Pollachi and quash the same.
2. Heard the learned counsels for the petitioners; learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the first respondent; learned counsel for the second respondent and perused the materials available on record.
3. The petitioners are the accused 1 to 3 and each one of the accused has filed a separate petition to quash the proceedings. The case of the prosecution is that the properties comprising to an extent of 96 acres 33 cents originally belonged to the second respondent’s ancestor by name Subbulakshmi Ammal; the said Subbulakshmi Ammal was the paternal aunt of the second respondent’s father; since her husband died long back she was staying with the second respondent’s family and the second respondent’s father Ayyasamy was maintaining the said Subbulakshmi Ammal and after having sold a portion of the property, she had 47 acres and 97 cents in Survey Nos.1/1 and 1/2 along with 4 acres 47 cents in Survey No.15 of A.Sangampalayam Village.
3.1. During the life time of Subbulakshmi Ammal, she had executed a registered Will dated 17.12.1995 in respect of the above properties and bequeathed the same in favour of the second respondent, his mother Jayalakshmi and his aunt Thilagavathy; Subbulakshmi died on 08.03.1996; as the second respondent and his family members were not able to maintain the properties, they had appointed the first accused as their power agent through a registered Power of Attorney dated 26.08.1996.
3.2. The first accused had sold a portion of the property by dividing it into house plots and the sale proceeds were not handed over to the second respondent and his family members; he also entered into a sale agreement with one Vadivel Gounder on 22.11.2007 in respect of 21 acres of land after obtaining Rs.1,52,09,600/- from him; the second respondent came to know about the said fact from Vadivel Gounder and thereafter, the second respondent asked the first accused about the transactions and to hand over the sale amount; but the first accused with an intention to cheat the second respondent and other owners of the property gave evasive answers; hence on 03.12.2007, the power granted in favour of the first accused was cancelled and the same was informed to him; in the meanwhile, the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department claimed the subject property as the property belongs to Subramania Swamy Temple, Pollachi; the second respondent contested the suit up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court and got a decree in his favour on 18.07.2016.
3.3. Thereafter, the first accused caused notice through an advocate by name M.Venkatesh on 28.02.2017 that he had entered into a sale agreement in respect of the said property in favour of one Vanjiyappa Gounder (A-3) and a sale deed has been executed in his favour; yet another notice was sent by another advocate in respect of the sale agreement dated 23.05.2006 which is said to have been entered in favour of Sundarraj (A-2).
3.4. On enquiry, the second respondent came to know that those sale agreements have been created just for the purpose of grabbing the said properties; in this regard, the second respondent has given a complaint and on the basis of which, a case has been registered on 14.03.2017 in F.I.R. No.7 of 2017 on the file of the District Crime Branch, Coimbatore for the offences under Sections 409 and 420 IPC.
4. The learned counsel for the petitio
The main legal point established is that the documents furnished by the petitioner, including the decree from the civil court, were of sterling quality and played a crucial role in quashing the charg....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the failure to fulfill contractual obligations can constitute cheating under Section 415 IPC if it causes harm to the other party.
The intention to cheat must exist at the very inception for a breach of contract to amount to cheating. Giving civil disputes the color of criminal disputes for a relatively fast relief in criminal c....
The court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C to quash criminal proceedings if they amount to an abuse of the process of the court or if quashing the proceedings would serve ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.