O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records in C.C.No.356 of 2018 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tambaram and to quash the same.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

3. It is a case where the accused sought for quash of the private complaint, which was taken on file by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tambaram in C.C.No.356 of 2018. The specific allegations made in the complaint is that the accused persons, who are the 1st petitioner and the 2nd respondent herein had illegally trespassed into the land, which is in possession of the de facto complainant and forcibly started to put up construction by digging foundation using two JCBs bearing Registration Nos.TN 22 BP 5940 and TN 63 L 6619. It is specifically alleged that the petitioner in possession holds possessory title for the property and on 25.06.2018, at about 10.00 a.m., nearly 20 police men, along with 2 advocates and the petitioners, have entered into the land and took forcible possession.

4. Narrating the series of litigations between the de facto complainant and the first respondent regarding the possessory right over the disputed land, it is specifically contended that, while the dispute between the landlord and the tenant in R.C.O.P.No.41 of 2006 pending before the Rent Controller, Alandur, the accused persons gathered at the disputed premises and took forcible possession by a false claim, that Hon'ble High Court has granted the police protection.

5. The main contention in the quash petition is that the title dispute between the de facto complainant and the owner reached the logical end, when the second appeal was dismissed against the de facto complainant, who claimed adverse possession over the property and filed a suit for declaration.

6. On 12.07.2018, in Crl.O.P.No.734 of 2018, this Court taking note of the fact that the petitioner herein, who is the Director of JG Shelters (Madras) LLP, has entered into the joint venture agreement for development of the land mentioned in the petition and when he commence the development work, the persons claiming themselves as member of political outfit illegally prevented the construction activity and hence, the petition seeking police protection was filed and the same was ordered by mentioning specific survey numbers, for which the petitioner is entitled to put up construction and the police protection is needed to ensure no threat or intimidation.

7. While so, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that only after the order of the Court granting police protection, the petitioner was able to enter into the land mentioned in the petition and commence the construction work whereas, by antedating the event, as if the petitioner and others have entered the premises on 25.06.2018, the private complaint has been lodged on 27.07.2018 with clear malified intention to show that the petitioners have committed criminal trespass into the land of the complainant and demolished his buildings.

8. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would also draw the attention of this Court to the order passed by this Court on 31.07.2018, wherein the clarification of the order dated 12.07.2018 was given by specifically stating that the Court has granted police protection only to put up compound wall in respect of the land mentioned in the report dated 19.04.2018 given by Special Tahsildar. The JG Shelters cannot demolish the tannery and the building of Sagayi Leathers nor can they cut off ingress and egress for the latter.

9. Subsequently, the complainant has filed the contempt petition before this Court and once again this Court has gone into merits of the allegations, particularly the allegation of criminal trespass and demolition of the property in possession and enjoyment of the complainant. This Court had in fact made spot inspection, exercising its power under Section 310 of Cr.P.C., and this Court itself has visited t