O R D E R

The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the criminal complaint registered in Crime No.738 of 2022 dated

27.12.2022.

2. The allegation as found in the FIR is that the petitioners herein, who are the owners of the property of a piece of land, have given a

Power of Attorney to the defacto complainant and also entered into Varthaman Deed. As per the Power of Attorney, complainant was authorised to deal with the said property and as per the Varthaman Deed, a sum of Rs.12 lakhs been received from him towards sale consideration, the petitioners promised to allow the defacto complainant to act on the Power of

Attorney.

3. Contrary to the agreement, it is alleged that the petitioners had unilaterally issued notice of cancellation of Power of Attorney and also filed suit and as a result, the complaint been enquired. Pending investigation, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present Crl.OP No.2887 of 2023 alleging that the civil suit pending been suppressed by the complainant and had sought the directions of the learned Magistrate to register the complaint and investigate. Accordingly as per directions of the Judicial Magistrate, the police has registered the complaint and proceeding with the investigation.

4. This Court at the time of admission of the quash petition found prima facie material and had passed the following order:-

“In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that already there is a civil suit pending in respect of the disputed property, this Court orders notice to second respondent, returnable in three weeks. Investigation shall go on in this case, however, filing of final report is to be deferred till then.”

5. When the matter came up for hearing on the subsequent date i.e., on 01.12.2023, the learned Government Advocate submits that enquiry completed and Final Report been uploaded through e-filing on 30.11.2023. Since the act of the respondent-police filing the Final Report, when there is a specific order to defer filing Final Report, the violation of the order Final Report alleged to have been filed. Therefore, this Court directed the Investigating Officer (IO) to explain under what circumstances the Final

Report was filed.

6. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), appearing on behalf of the first respondent-Police, after verification of the records submitted that due to inadvertence, on the enquiry by the

Prosecutor's Office, the Final Report has been filed. However, a letter has been given to the concerned learned Magistrate not to take the complaint on file. The explanation given by the State Government Advocate is accepted and the Court is not inclined to go further into the violation of interim orders and proceed with the merits of this petition.

7. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the dispute is purely of a civil nature. The Power of Attorney was given in favour of the defacto complainant but later it was cancelled. Also suit is filed to declare the Power of Attorney as null and void as well as injunction to restrain the defacto complainant from dealing with the property through the Power of Attorney Deed. The petition filed by the defacto complainant to reject the plaint also dismissed and the civil suit is pending for adjudication. While-so, suppressing the facts about the pendency of civil suit, the complaint under Section 200 read with Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., was presented before the learned Judicial Magistrate and the same has been forwarded to the respondent-police to investigate and to file a report. The Varthaman Deed alleged to have been executed upon the petitioners, is not genuine and the petitioners have not received any consideration in support of the Power of Attorney given to the defacto complainant.

8. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent-defacto complainant submitted that it is the clear case of deception and cheating. After receiving