BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 01.11.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN Crl.O.P(MD).N os.16737 & 16621 o f 2021 and Cr.M.P.(MD).Nos.9049 & 8973 of 2021 Crl.O.P.(MD).No.16737 of 2021 Balakrishnan ... Petitioner/ Sole Accused Vs.

1. State rep. by its The Inspector of Police, Asaripallam Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

(Crime No.214 of 2021) ... 1^st Respondent/Complainant

2. Shankar ... 2^nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No.214 of 2021 on the file of the

1^st respondent police and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.J.Karthick For Respondents : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

for R1 : Mr.T.Arul for R2 *****

1.Ramachandran

2.Gunaseelam 3.Gunsekaran

4.Lakshmikanthan

5.Rajendran ... Petitioners Vs.

1. State rep. by its The Inspector of Police, Asaripallam Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

(Crime No.216 of 2021) ... 1^st Respondent/Complainant

2. Shankar ... 2^nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in Crime No.216 of 2021 on the file of the

1^st respondent police and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.R.J.Karthick For Respondents : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Government Advocate(Crl.Side)

for R1 : Mr.T.Arul for R2

COMMON ORDER

The petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.16737 of 2021 has been filed this st petition to quash the FIR in Crime No.214 of 2021, on the file of the 1 respondent police.

2.According to the prosecution, the petitioner trespassed into the property of the defacto complainant and caused damages to the compound wall. Hence, the case was registered for the said offence. Subsequently, the defacto complainant made a complaint, thereafter, the investigation was going on. During the pendency of the investigation, the defacto complainant once again constructed the compound wall. Again the petitioner also trespassed into the property of the defacto complainant and caused damages to the compound wall. Hence, another complaint was given and the same was registered in Crime No. 216 of 2021. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has filed the petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.16621 of 2021.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the petitioners are not involved in the said occurrence and the petitioners have filed with malafide and also civil suit is pending between the parties. Hence, there is no illegal trespass and the petitioners also have the right over the property. 4.The learned counsel for the defacto complainant would submit that the petitioners have trespassed the house. It is to be noted that the pendency of the dispute is not a bar to initiate the criminal proceedings. In the civil suit, there is no order in favour of the petitioners and hence he has committed the offences as alleged in the FIR.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), on instructions, submits that the investigation has been completed in both cases and the investigating agency has found that they have demolished the building after the proper investigation.Final report is also filed before the concerned Court.

6.This Court considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on records.

7. Considering the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that the investigating agency has completed the investigation and filed the final report before the concerned court with specific opinion that the petitioners have demolished the building on the basis of the material collected during the investigation and the submission of the defacto complainant that he obtained injunction in the civil suit, despite the same, the petitioners criminally trespassed into the property and caused damages. Hence, this court is not inclined to peruse the factual aspects by exercising the extraordinary inherent power under secti