IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13.06.2022

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN

Crl.O.P.No.31165 of 2019

1.T.Vasudevan

2.T.Suresh Surya

… Petitioners/Accused 1&2

Vs

1. The State

Represented by Inspector of Police,

District Crime Branch,

Namakkal District.

... Respondent/Complainant

2. S.Pappathi

… 2^nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section

482 of Cr.P.C. to call for the records pertaining to the charge

sheet in C.C.No.117 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial

Magistrate, Paramathyvelur, Namakkal District and quash the

same.

For Petitioner :

Mr.M.P.Saravanan

For Respondents

:

Mr.S.Suganthan

Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1

:

No appearance

ORDER

The petition filed to quash the criminal proceedings pending

on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Paramathyvelur,

Namakkal District in C.C.No.117 of 2019.

2. One S.Pappathi, w/o Selvaraj, lodged a complaint against

the petitioners alleging that they fraudulently transferred the

property of her maternal uncles who are presently residing in

Malaysia by impersonation pursuant to the conspiracy hatched by

A1 and other accused, Accused is friend of A2 and A2 is relative

to Palanisamy, Subramanian and Kaliyappan who are the real

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

owners of the property. A1 and A2 in connivence of A3 and A4

produced fake documents and impersonators for registration

before the Sub Registrar, Paramathyvelur and got the property

registered in their names as if the Palanisamy, Subramanian and

Kaliyappan had executed the property in favour of A1 –

T.Vasudevan. When this came to the knowledge of Pappathi, a case

has been registered and taken up for investigation.

3. In the course of the investigation, the accused persons

A1 and A2 were arrested. Pending bail petition, they cancelled

the disputed sale deed executed in their favour, pursuant to

which they were granted bail.

4. With the said background the quash petition is filed on

two grounds:

(i) Firstly, the alleged impersonators are not

arrayed as accused.

(ii) Since the sale deed is cancelled, the

petitioners are no more beneficiaries of the crime. The

respondent police without ascertaining the impersonators

who sold the property to A1, had filed the final report

against the bonafied purchasers without even arraying the

impersonators who had sold the property.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit

that the identity of the impersonators are exclusively known

only to the petitioners herein being relatives to Palanisamy,

Subramanian and Kaliyappan who are the real owners of the

property. They know the real owners and arranged impersonators

to create sale deed fraudulently. They have impersonated the

original owners and created documents in their own favour and

therefore, they cannot be treated as bonafied purchasers.

6. The investigation disclosed that these two persons in

conspiracy with the other two accused had arranged for the fake

photo identity card of the impersonators for creating the sale

deed which later came to be cancelled, pursuant to the direction

of this Court.

7. The sale deed got registered in the name of petitioners

herein knowing very well that the persons who have executed the

sale deed in their favour are not the real owners and the

documents they produced before the Sub-Registrar for

registration are fake and fabricated. The documents created

pursuant to the conspiracy to cheat the real owners of the

property. Impersonators have executed the deed in favour of the

petitioners to enrich themselves and therefore, the petitioners

herein are liable to face the trial.

8. Per contra, in response to the Government Advocate (Crl.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Side) submissions, the learned