Deceptive inducement to vacate premises constitutes cheating under IPC, validating criminal proceedings despite concurrent civil claims.

ORDER :

G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

1.The private complaint by Dr.A.N.Harilal, through his Power of Attorney Mr.Ravi Subramaniam, was taken cognizance by the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Alandur against the petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.9703 of 2023 and Crl.O.P.No.8678 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 143 , 447, 448, 453, 454, 427, 506(i), 406 and 420 r/w 120(B) of IPC.

2. The petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.9703 of 2023 are the first and second accused. The petitioners in Crl.O.P.No. 8678 of 2023 are the fourth to seventh accused.

3. Sum and substance of the complaint is that on 26.02.2001, the petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.9703 of 2023 entered into a 90 years lease agreement with the complainant and received Rs.3,00,000/- as advance. The lease rent was fixed as Rs.2,000/- per month. As per the terms of the lease, after expiry of 10 years period, the complainant is vested with right of option to purchase the property. In the leasehold land measuring to an extent of one acre, the complainant has constructed a farm house by spending about Rs.70 lakhs and had obtained electricity service connection in his name. Exercising his option to purchase the land, a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- was paid by cash to the first accused on various dates and ready to pay the balance consideration. While so, the first accused stating that the property tax imposed is over and above the rent fixed, sought for a letter from the complainant indicating cancellation of the 90 years lease agreement. Accordingly, the complainant gave a letter to facilitate the first accused to get tax reduction. Taking advantage of the said letter, the first accused and his henchmen tried to dispossess the complainant, which has led to filing of suit for permanent injunction before the District Munsif Court, Alanthur in the month of August 2019 and the suit was numbered as O.S.No.410 of 2019. While so, on 08.11.2019 the first and second accused along with 15 persons came to the property, illegally entered into it, broke open the farm house lock and thrown out all the articles kept inside the house and forcibly took the possession. In this connection, when the complainant went to the J-12 Kaanathur Police Station, to give complaint, the Police were busy with Ayodhya Verdict Meeting and the complaint was not received by the police.

4. Thereafter, on 10.11.2019, the complaint was received by Kaanathur Police and C.S.R.No.312 of 2019 was issued and he was put in possession on the intervention of the police. However, on the next day, the third accused Mr.T.A.S.Sundar claimed that he had purchased the property from the first and second accused and the sale deed got duly registered on 07.11.2019. On the next day i.e. on 13.11.2019 the third accused damaged the compound wall of the property and also damaged the properties kept in the premises. The swimming pool has been filled with sand and the name board of the complainant affixed outside the compound wall was removed. From verification with the SRO, the complainant had come to know that the first accused had sold the property to the accused 4 to 7 including the building constructed by the complainant. The complainant apart from filing the suit for injunction, sought for police protection and registered his complaint by way of a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. before the High Court.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) reported to the Court that C.S.No. 312 of 2019 registered on the complaint given by Dr.Harilal (complainant) been closed. Recording the said submission, the High Court granted liberty to the complainant to file private complaint in the manner known to law. Alleging th