BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:10.06.2024 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN Crl.O.P(MD).No.20278 of 2022 and Crl.R.C.(MD).No.409 of 2023 and Crl.M.P.(MD).Nos.14059 of 2022 & 6012 of 2023 Crl.O.P.(MD).No.20278 of 2022:

Marrygrace @ Mary Grace ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Sub Inspector of Police, CCIW-CID, Sivagangai Police Station, Sivagangai, (In Crime No.1 /2021).

2.Manimegalai ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records more particularly the impugned charge sheet in C.C.No.153 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.2, Sivagangai, and quash the same as against the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Parthiban For Respondents : Mr.R.Sivakumar, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1 Crl.R.C.(MD).No.409 of 2023:

Marrygrace @ Mary Grace ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Sub Inspector of Police, CCIW-CID, Sivagangai Police Station, Sivagangai, (In Crime No.1 /2021). ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to the order dated 22.02.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.10912 of 2023 in C.C.No.153 of 2021, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Sivagangai, and set aside the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Parthiban For Respondents : Mr.R.Sivakumar, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

COMMON ORDER

The petitioner has filed petition in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.20278 of 2022 to quash the proceedings initiated against her in C.C.No.153 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.2, Sivagangai.

2.The petitioner filed this petition in Crl.R.C.(MD).No.409 of 2023 to set aside the impugned order dated 22.02.2023 made in Cr.M.P.No.10912 of 2023 in C.C.No.153 of 2021, by the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Sivagangai.

3.The allegation in the final report against the petitioner and other accused is that the petitioner and the other accused conspired together and obtained loan of Rs.1,74,000/-. Further allegation is that all the accused conspired together and created false records and obtained loan.

4.According to the revision petitioner, the allegation against the petitioner is that the loan was granted without verifying the existence of the building. There was manipulation of records relating to the disputed property and valuation was also not properly done.

5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner made the following defence submissions:

5.1.The patta is concerned, it was granted at the time of loan in the year

2002 patta stood in the name of one Arumugam S/O.Karuppaya, and the same was affirmed by the statement of the village administrative officer.

5.2.The existence of the building is concerned, all the witnesses stated that the building existed little away from the survey Number. Further, the Sub Registrar's statement was also recorded and he has stated that the registration office has not registered any document relating to the building situated at Poramboke. Hence, it implies that the building was existing.

5.3.The valuation certificate is concerned, he furnished the valuation only on the basis of the available records and the same cannot be doubted. Thus, he wants to discharge the accused and quash the proceedings against him.

5.4.Earlier, the petitioner filed a discharge petition in Cr.M.P.(MD).No.

10912 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Sivagangai, and the same was dismissed by the learned trial Judge. Challenging the same, he filed the revision petition. Parallely, he also filed quash petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

6.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police on instructions, submitted that sufficient material is available on record. The existence of building in S.No.107/3 little away from the disputed property is a question of fact which is to be decided after appreciation of the evidence. The patta stood in the name of one Arumugam S/O.Kar