The courts will not interfere with criminal investigations unless the FIR is frivolous or does not disclose an offence.

C O M M O N O R D E R

These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.25 of 2022 on the file of the first respondent Police.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the property bearing Plot Nos.264 and 265, situated at Sri Lakshmi Amman Nagar, Puthagaram Village, Saidapet Taluk, Chengalpet District, measuring an extent of 4800 sq.ft., is owned by one Rajan Chacko. The petitioners, along with other persons, impersonated the original owner of the property and executed a power of attorney in favor of one Arivunidhi. These persons sold the property on the strength of the power of attorney.

2.1. It is the further case of the prosecution that originally a complaint was lodged by the original owner's legal heir's power agent, one Ajayponmany and the same was registered in Crime No. 84 of 2021 for the offenses punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, and 34 of IPC. Thereafter, the fifth accused in Crime No. 84 of 2021 entered into an agreement of sale with one Kalyanasundaram by suppressing the aforesaid facts. Therefore, the agreement holder, Kalyanasundaram, lodged a complaint against Rajendran and others, and it was registered in Crime No. 24 of 2022 for the offenses under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC.

2.2. The said Rajendran came to know that he was also cheated by impersonating the original owner and executing a power of attorney. On the strength of the same, they executed a sale deed in favor of Rajendran. Thereafter, on the complaint lodged by Rajendran, the present First Information Report in Crime No. 25 of 2022 was registered against the petitioners and others for the offenses punishable under Sections 406, 420, and

34 of IPC.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that all three First Information Reports have been registered for the very same cause of action. The original owners of the subject property came to understand about the fraudulent encumbrance certificate made in the subject property through their power of attorney and thereafter lodged a complaint in Crime No. 84 of 2021. He would further submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and have not committed any offense as alleged by the prosecution. Without any basis, the first respondent police registered a case in Crime No. 25 of 2022 for the offenses under Sections 406, 420, and 34 of IPC against the petitioners.

Hence, he prayed to quash the same.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent would submit that the investigation is almost completed and only the final report is yet to be filed by the first respondent.

5. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.

6. On a perusal of the records, it reveals that one Arivunidhi, in collusion with the petitioners, created a fraudulent power of attorney by impersonating the original owner of the property and executed a sale deed in favor of Rajendran for a sale consideration of Rs. 1,45,00,000/-. However, without disclosing this, Rajendran entered into an agreement with one Kalyanasundaram. Therefore, Kalyanasundaram lodged another complaint, which was registered in Crime No. 24 of 2022. After the registration of the First Information Report, Rajendran came to know about the fraudulent power of attorney created by impersonating the original owner of the property. As such, he lodged the present complaint, which was registered in Crime No. 25 of 2022. Therefore, all three First Information Reports have been registered on different sets of causes of action. However, now all the First Information Reports are p