IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON : 21.09.2022 PRONOUNCED ON: 30.09.2022 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.No.14688 of 2022 and Crl.M.P.No.8129 of 2022 R.Dharmalingam ...Petitioner -Vs-
1. K.P.Ramasamy
2. K.P.Deivasigamani
3. K.P.Nataraj
4. C.R.Anandhakrishnan
5. State rep. by The Inspector of Police, CBCID (South), Coimbatore. ... Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, pleased to set aside the order dated 10.06.2022 made in CMP.No.8274 of 2022 in CMP.No.337 of 2019 in CC.No.21480 of 2019 on the file of the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore by allowing this Criminal Original Petition.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Manoharan For R1 to R4 : Mr.Ar.L.Sundaresan, Senior Counsel for M/s.A.L.Gandhimathi For R5 : Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed challenging the order passed in C.M.P.No.8274 of 2022 in CMP.No.337 of 2019 in CC.No.21480 of 2019 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,Coimbatore, thereby allowed the petition filed under Section 91 of Cr.P.C to issue summons to cause production of office copy of the enquiry report pertaining to the complaint of N.J.Subramaniam submitted to the Registrar (Vigilance), High Court, Madras, wherein an enquiry had been done by the ADSP-Vigilance Cell(Judicial), Coimbatore.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he and his brother are having ancestral properties in S.F.No.138/1 and 138/2, Neelambur Village, Coimbatore District. On 27.06.2006, they sold out the property ad- measuring to an extent of 4 acres to the respondents 1 to 3 herein for valid consideration. Subsequently, the petitioner's wife one Parameswari filed a suit in O.S.No.245 of 2006 on behalf of her minor children against the respondents 1 to 3 claiming equal share in the property which was already sold out. Therefore, there was enmity between the petitioner's family and the respondents 1 to 3 herein.
3. In order to get over the suit, the respondents 1 to 3 along with other unknown persons namely N.J.Subramaniam and 2 others created a bogus agreement for sale dated 15.03.2006 by forging the signature of the petitioner's family members for the land ad-measuring to an extent of 1.60 acres and filed a suit for specific performance in O.S.No.438 of 2009. The agreement for sale dated 15.03.2006 is a fake document. The said N.J.Subramaniam and 2 other witnesses whose name was entered in the bogus document were not known to the petitioner and his family members. The signature found in the document is not of the petitioner or of his family members. Subsequently, the suit filed by the said N.J.Subramaniam was withdrawn.
4.Thereafter, the petitioner lodged a complaint and on receipt of the same, the Inspector of Police, Sulur Police Station had conducted enquiry and closed the petition on 10.08.2015. Therefore, the petitioner was constrained to file a petition in Crl.O.P.No.15024 of 2015 before this Court and this Court directed the Inspector of Police to conduct fresh enquiry by setting aside the closure report dated 10.08.2015. In pursuant to the direction, the respondent police had registered FIR in Crime No.306 of 2016 and submitted a closure report dated 10.04.2016 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.7, Coimbatore as 'Further Action Dropped'. Hence, the petitioner again approached this Court for transfer of investigation in Crl.O.P.No.15756 of 2016 and the same was allowed and transferred the investigation to CCB, Coimbatore for re- investigation. Again, the Inspector of Police, CCB, did not conduct any enquiry and as such, the petitioner was constrained to file a petition in Crl.O.P.No.23712 of 2016 for transfer of investigation from the file of CCB to the file of CBCID, the 5th respondent herein.
5. After registration of FIR in Crime No. 2 of 2016, the 5th respondent did not complete the investigation as such, the petitioner again filed a petition for direction in Crl.O.P.No.22787 of 2018 before this Court. This Court directed the 5th respondent to complete the investigation and file final report within a period of two months. Therefore, the 5th respondent filed a final report on 26.12.2018 only against the said N.J.Subramaniam and deleted the respondents 1 to 4 herein and served the RCS notice to the petitioner in so far as the respondents 1 to 4 are concerned. On receipt of the same, the petitioner filed a protest petition in C.M.P.No.337 of 2019 and also filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate dismissed the protest petition in C.M.P.No.337 of 2019. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner preferred a revision before this Court in Crl.R.C.No.967 of 2019 and the same was allowed by order dated 13.11.2019. This Court concluded that all the accused
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.