ORDER :

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

This Criminal Original petition has been filed seeking to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.41 of 2022 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Special Court for Trial of Land Grabbing Cases, Coimbatore.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the second respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioner/eighth accused and seven other accused persons. The allegation is that under a registered partition deed, dated 11.11.1959 in Document No.6220 of 1959, the ‘B’ schedule property was allotted in favour of one Nataraja Nadar, who is the father of the first accused, namely, Soundararajan. The said Nataraja Nadar had borrowed money from one A.Noor Mohammed and committed default. Consequently, the said A.Noor Mohammed filed a suit for recovery of money in OS.No.185 of 1971. The suit was decreed and in order to release the decree amount, the property bearing Survey No.110/2 measuring an extent of 3.4 acres situated at Perur Chettipalayam, Village, Coimbatore South Taluk, Coimbatore, which had been allotted in favour of Nataraja Nadar, was brought to public auction on 14.11.1979. During the said auction, the second respondent purchased the property for a sum of Rs.17,559/-. The second respondent took possession of the property. The revenue records were also mutated in his name and patta was also issued in his favour. While that being so, the first accused, being the son of the said Nataraja Nadar, created a Will in the year 1992 as if the said Nataraja Nadar had settled the said property in his favour. Thereafter, the first accused by offering the said property as collateral security, availed loan from M/s.ING Vysya Bank Ltd., R.S.Puram Branch, Coimbatore to the tune of Rs.2,94,95,844.16. Subsequently, the first accused had committed default in repayment of the loan. Therefore, the Bank initiated proceedings under SARFAESI Act and attached the subject property. Only thereafter, the second respondent came to know about the proceedings and lodged a complaint. After receipt of the said complaint, the first respondent registered a case in Crime No.55 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 and 120(B) IPC. After completion of investigation, a final report was filed and the same was taken on file as C.C.No.41 of 2022.

3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as the eighth accused. He had joined the M/s.ING Vysya Bank Ltd., R.S.Puram Branch, Coimbatore in the year 1992 and relieved from the said Branch in the year 1997. In the year 1994, on receipt of loan application from the first accused, after verification of legal opinion issued by the Legal Unit, he merely recommended for loan. Ultimately, the Head Office of the M/s.ING Vysya Bank Ltd. sanctioned the loan based on the mortgage created over the property.

4. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the alleged Will was fabricated in the year 1992 by forging the signature of Nataraja Nadar, who was the original owner of the property. The petitioner had absolutely no knowledge about such alleged fabrication or forgery. There is no material to show that the petitioner conspired with the other accused persons. The learned Senior Counsel in support of his contentions, relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Mariam Fasihuddin and another vs. State by Adugodi Police Station and another reported in 2014 11 Supreme Court Cases 733 and State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and Others reported in 1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court Cases 335.

5. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the first respondent submitted that the petitioner was the Manager of the M/s.ING Vysya Bank Ltd., R.S.Puram Branch, Coimbatore at the time of sanctioning the loan. He conspired together with other accused persons, forged the signature of Nataraja Nadar and fabricated the Will in respect of the subject property in favour of the first accused. On