IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28.02.2024 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.O.P.Nos.6918 of 2022 and 7915 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.No.5241 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.Nos.3920 &9486 of 2022 `

Crl.O.P.No.6918 of 2022

1. Vinodh Khanna

2. Gayathri ... Petitioners Vs.

Prem Anand ...

Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in C.C.No.255 of 2021 pending on the file of the learned VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.K.P.Anantha krishnan For Mr.K.Harishankar For Respondent : Mr.A.Kandhan Crl.O.P.No.7915 of 2021

1. G.Sathish Kumar

2. S.Deepalakshmi ... Petitioners Vs.

K.Prem Anand ...

Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in C.C.No.255 of 2021 pending on the file of the learned VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, at George Town, Chennai.

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Jayaprakash For Respondent : Mr.A.Kandhan

COMMON ORDER

These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed to call for the records in C.C.No.255 of 2021 pending on the file of the learned VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidepat, Chennai.

2. The respondent/defacto complainant herein is the brother of the second petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.7915 of 2021. Further, the respondent has given a complaint stating that on 27.02.2019 at about 12.40 p.m., the petitioners have illegally entered into the office of the respondent and stolen certain documents such as original Will written by the respondent's father C.T.Krishnamoorthy, Income Tax returns for the year 2006-2007 & 2018-2019, important machine drawings of the respondent. Further, all the incident was recorded in the CCTV footage. Taking advantage of the CCTV footage, the respondent has given a complaint before the respondent police on 28.02.2019 and the same was registered in CSR.No.48 of 2019. Subsequently, the complaint was closed. Thereafter, the respondent has given a private complaint before the trial Court and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.255 of 2021.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners in both petitions submitted that the second petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.7915 of 2021 is the sister of the defacto complainant. He further submitted that originally, the properties belongs to one Samarapuri Chettiar, who is the great grand father of the respondent. He further submitted that the said Samarapuri Chettiar had a wife named Vaduvambal and having 3 sons namely, Ramaswamy, Thirunavukkarasu and Sundaram and 3 daughters Ganammal, Janakiammal and Sampurammal. Further, the petitioners and the defacto complaiant are claimed right over the suit property through Thirunavukkarasu who is the son of Samarapuri Chettiar. He further submitted that there was dispute among themselves in respect of the suit property. Against which, the civil suit in C.S.No.290 of 2016 was pending before the original Jurisdiction for partition in the year 2016 and also suit in O.S.No.1659 of 2016 was pending. He further submitted that there was no such alleged occurrence happened as alleged by the respondent/defacto complainant. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioners prayed to quash the proceedings.

4. The learned counsel for the respondent in both petitions submitted that the civil suit is pending between the parties, on the date alleged occurrence, the petitioners along with other accused persons have trespassed into the office of the respondent/defacto complainant and stolen the documents, original Will executed by one C.T.Krishnamurthy. Therefore, the respondent/defacto complainant has given a complaint before the respondent police and the same was closed. Further, the respondent has filed a private complaint before the trial Court against the petitioners. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of these petitions.

5. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case and on perused the records, it reveals that on the date of occurrence, namely, Deepalakshmi, Vinodh Ka