IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18.03.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.No. 7919 of 2025 and Crl.M.P.No.5134 of 2025 Dr.V.Rani .... Petitioner Vs

1.The State rep. by Inspector of Police, Fairlands Police Station, Alagapuram, Salem District.

2.T.Subha .... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to call for the records to the FIR No.212 of 2024 dated 25.05.2024, on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.E.KKumaresan For R1 : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No. 212 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 506(2), 109 and 3 of IPC.

2. The case of the prosecution, as per FIR, is that the first Respondent Police registered an FIR in Crime No.212 of 2024 against the petitioner and four others, based on a complaint lodged by the de-facto complainant, alleging that the de-facto complainant was residing with her family as a tenant on the third floor of Swarnapuri RV Towers and had proposed to purchase the apartment from the original owner, one Ulaganathan, for Rs.2.5 crores, having paid an advance of Rs.1.70 crores in 2019. Subsequently, the petitioner allegedly purchased the same apartment and demanded that the de-facto complainant to vacate it. Therefore, a civil suit in O.S. No.253 of 2021 was filed by the de-facto complainant before the III Additional District Court, Salem, seeking specific performance against the legal heirs of the said Ulaganathan and the petitioner, which is still pending. While being so, the petitioner, along with unknown persons, threatened the de-facto complainant and on various occasions damaged her vehicles while she was away. The watchman reportedly informed her that the petitioner and others were responsible. In respect of the above incidents, complaints were previously lodged and CSR Nos. 292/2021, 731/2021, and 554/2022 were issued. At this juncture, on 02.05.2024, while the de-facto complainant was at the car parking area, the petitioner and others allegedly threatened her again, following which the present complaint was lodged, leading to registration of the FIR.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire FIR is nothing but a civil dispute given a criminal colour. The de-facto complainant had entered into an agreement with the original owner, Ulaganathan, for purchase of the apartment and had paid an advance. However, the petitioner subsequently purchased the property through a valid sale transaction. The de-facto complainant has already filed a suit for specific performance in O.S. No.253 of 2021 before the III Additional District Court, Salem, which is pending adjudication. It is further submitted that the allegations made in the FIR are vague, general in nature, and intended to harass the petitioner. The prior complaints mentioned by the de-facto complainant, for which CSR numbers were assigned, did not result in any FIR or final report. The current FIR is filed with a mala fide intent to pressurize the petitioner during the pendency of the civil litigation. The alleged incident on 02.05.2024 is a continuation of the same civil dispute and no specific overt act has been attributed to the petitioner. Hence, the continuation of the criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process of law, and the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR.

4. The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) submitted that the FIR discloses cognizable offences and the allegations made by the de- facto complainant are serious in nature. The complaint narrates that the petitioner and other accused, on multiple occasions, harassed and threatened the de-facto complainant, damaged her vehicles, and unlawfully interfered with her peaceful possession of the apartment. The latest incident dated 02.05.2024, where the petitioner and others all