BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.07.2023 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Crl.O.P(MD).No.11235 of 2020 and Crl.M.P(MD) No.5127 of 2020

1. Varadharaj

2. Raman

3. Neethi ...Petitioners Vs

1. The Inspector of Police Devathanapatti Police Station, Theni District

2. Arivalagan ...Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying this Court to call for the records on the file of the first respondent/complainant in Crime No.1362 of 2020 and quash the same as illegal as far as the petitioners 1 to 3 accused are concerned.

For Petitioners : Mr.M.A.M.Raja For R-1 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor For R-2 : No appearance

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.1362 of 2020 pending on the file of the first respondent.

2. There is no representation on behalf of the second respondent/defacto complainant. Already this case was adjourned several times for hearing the second respondent. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing there is no appearance on behalf of the second respondent. Already this Court had elaborately heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent, hence this Court is inclined to pass orders with the available records.

3. According to the petitioner, the first respondent/ complainant has registered the First Information Report in Crime No.1362 of 2020 for the offences under sections 447 and 427 of IPC dated 25.09.2020 against the petitioners herein. Infact the mother of the first petitioner namely Muthulakhmi and one M.Raju had registered partnership business of real estate in the name of “PRV Properties” in the year 2012 and the said Raju was an active partner and the mother of the first petitioner is a silent partner. Partnership firm had purchased properties for business and sold out into plots as per deed. There was dispute between the partners regarding rendering of property accounts and sharing of profit, hence the mother of the first petitioner has filed a civil suit in O.S.No.1 of 2016 before the District Munsif Court, Periyakulam and the said suit was closed since the matter was referred to arbitration. Thereafter, the mother of the first petitioner has filed Arbitration Original Petition for appointment of arbitrator in O.P.No.348 of 2019 and the same was closed by Arbitrator on 20.03.2023 on the basis of point of limitation with a finding that civil trial is necessary for the right of the parties. Therefore the mother of the first petitioner filed a civil suit in O.S. No.21 of 2017 before the District Court, Theni for dissolution of partnership, to render account and for partition over the properties. Infact the said Raju has filed so many false complaints against the first petitioner and his mother with regard to this issue in the year 2019and the said Raju had induced one Kumaresan who is alleged to be the watchman of the property to lodge complaint as against the petitioner and the First Information Report was registered in Crime No.224 of 2018 by the first respondent, however the same was quashed by this Court by an order dated 26.04.2019 in Crl.O.P(MD) No.5945 of 2019 by holding that the mother of the first petitioner has equal share of the disputed property. Again the said Raju had induced one Duraipandi and lodged complaint through him against the petitioner in Crime No.316 of 2018 which was challenged before this Court in Crl.O.P(MD) No.9676 of 2018 and the same is pending. Again the said Duraipandi induced Kumaresan to lodge complaint against him for illegal trespass and life threat in Crime No.73 of 2019 in that case final report was filed in C.C. No.152 of 2019 and the same is pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Periyakulam. The second petitioner is none other than the henchmen of the said Raju. No occurrence had taken place a