Crl.A.No.315 of 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18 .08.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

Judgment Reserved On

04.01.2023

Judgment Pronounced On

18.08.2023

Crl.A.No.315 of 2014

C.V.Thambidurai

... Appellant/Complainant

Vs.

1.A.Natarajan

2.A.Gopalraj

3.V.Saraswathi

... Respondents/A1 to A3

PRAYER: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C., to call

for the records in C.C.No.630 of 2007, and set aside the judgment of

acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VII, Coimbatore,

dated 28.10.2013.

For Appellant

:

Mr.C.Arunkumar

for Mr.S.Gopinath

For Respondents

:

Mr.A.Ashwin Kumar

Legal Aid Counsel

1/28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.No.315 of 2014

JUDGMENT

This Criminal Appeal is arising out of acquittal of the

respondents/Accused Nos.1 to 3 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate

No.VII, Coimbatore, in C.C.No.630 of 2007, dated 28.10.2013.

2. For the sake of convenience, the appellant and the respondents are

referred to as 'complainant' and 'accused', respectively.

3. The brief facts of the case, as projected by the prosecution, are as

follows:

(i) Accused Nos.1 to 3 and one N.Pachiammal and

S.Palaniammal/Accused Nos.4 and 5 are the owners of the land comprised

in S.F.No.834/1, to an extent of 14.90 Acres, situated at Chettipalayam

Village. All the accused agreed to sell the property to the complainant for a

sale consideration of Rs.2,23,500/-. On 06.07.1992 all the accused executed

an agreement for sale after receiving advance amount of Rs.15,000/-. Ex.P.1

is the Agreement for Sale. Thereafter, the complainant had paid balance

sale consideration on various dates. Ex.P.7 series are the Receipts. After

2/28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.No.315 of 2014

receiving the entire amount, on 09.03.1994, all the accused issued Ex.P.2

Receipt and executed a Power of Attorney in favour of the complainant with

respect to the above said property. Ex.P.3 is the Power of Attorney.

Thereafter, the complainant spent huge sum and formed a layout in the

property, divided into plots and sold 129 sites to various persons and 54

sites were remaining for sale.

(ii) In the meanwhile, all the accused cancelled the Power of

Attorney, through a registered cancellation deed, dated 16.03.2007. Ex.P.6

is the Cancellation Deed. Thereafter, the accused sent Ex.P.4 Notice to the

complainant on 19.03.2007, for which, the complainant sent Ex.P.5 Reply

Notice. Exs.P.8 to P.11 are the Balance Sheet of Jay Jay Associates, owned

by the complainant, Income Tax Returns and Balance Sheet. All the

accused after receiving entire sale consideration with an intention to cheat

the complainant, cancelled the Power of Attorney.

(iii) During the pendency of trial, the said N.Pachiammal and

S.Palaniammal/Accused Nos.4 and 5 died and therefore, charge against

them stood abated.

3/28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.A.No.315 of 2014

3. Before the trial Court, on the side of prosecution, P.Ws.1 and 2

were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.11 were marked, no material object was

produced. On completion of examination of the witnesses on the side of the

prosecution, the accused were questioned under Section 313(1)(b) Cr.P.C.,

as to the incriminating circumstances found in the evidence of the

prosecution witnesses and they denied them as false. On behalf of the

defence, no witness was examined, but Exs.D.1 to D.8 were marked as

defence documents.

4. Considering the evidence available on record, the learned Judicial

Magistrate No.VII, Coimbatore, by judgment dated 28.10.2013, found the

accused not guilty for the offence under Section 420 I.P.C. and acquitted

them, as the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond

reasonable doubt. Challenging the said judgment of acquittal, the

complainant has preferred this appeal.

5. The learned counsel f