No prima facie evidence established against the accused for the alleged offenses; civil disputes should not be reframed as criminal charges without substantive grounds.

COMMON ORDER

These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed by the petitioners to quash the charge sheet filed in C.C. No.400 of 2023 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Dindigul.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the 1st accused namely Kannan is the brother of the defacto complainant and the 2nd accused B. Venkateswaralu is the son of the defacto complainant's Sister and the 1st accused. The father of the defacto complainant namely M.S. Raju died, while he was taking treatment in A.R. Hospital, K.K. Nagar, Madurai on 12.02.2012. The said factum of death was registered before the Madurai Corporation office. While so, without disclosing the fact that the deceased M.S. Raju died at Madurai A.R. Hospital, they obtained certificate from Dr. Ashokkumar, Dindigul as if the said M.S. Raju died in his house at Dindigul and registered the same before the Dindigul Corporation and obtained Legal Heir Certificate from the Tahsildar. Thereafter, based on the Death Certificate obtained from the Dindigul Corporation and the Certificate obtained from the Cremation Centre, in order to grab the properties of the said M.S. Raju, the accused caused criminal intimidation. The 2nd accused abetted the 1st accused by mentioning his name as 'informer' in the death intimation form for the death of M.S. Raju, thereby, they committed the offences under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 506(i) of IPC. The 1st accused was charged under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 506(i) of IPC and the 2nd accused was charged under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of IPC.

3. Since both the Criminal Original petitions are arising out of the same charge sheet, this Court is inclined to pass a common order.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner in Crl. O.P. No.4324 of 2024 is arrayed as 1st accused and the petitioner in Crl. O.P. No.4821 of 2025 is arrayed as 3rd accused and one Dr. Ashok Kumar was arrayed as 2nd accused in the FIR. In fact, the 2nd respondent herein / defacto complainant has sent a complaint dated 16.07.2021 to the 1st respondent by post and thereafter, filed a Writ petition in W.P. No.13321 of 2021 seeking direction to enquire into the complaint and thereafter, the 2nd respondent filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Dindigul under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and the learned Magistrate forwarded the said complaint to the 1st respondent herein and subsequently, the 1st respondent has registered a case in Cr. No.41 of 2021 for the offences under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 506(i) of IPC. The 2nd accused, who was a Doctor, has filed a petition before this Court in Crl. O.P.(MD) No. 2466 of 2022 seeking to quash the FIR against him and the same was allowed by this Court vide order dated 04.02.2022. Thereafter, the 1st respondent filed a charge sheet as against the petitioners in these petitions i.e., A1 and A2 without any prima facie evidence. There is a property dispute between the parties in respect of Survey No.367/5A to an extent of 1.2 acres. The father of the petitioner in Crl. O.P.(MD) No. 4324 of 2024 namely M.S. Raju (A1 as per charge sheet) was residing at Gopalpatti, Dindigul along with his wife and he was suffering from heart ailment from 11.02.2012. Dr. Ashokkumar, who is the family Doctor of the said M.S. Raju, had given treatment at his house and subsequently, the said Raju was taken to A.R. hospital, Madurai for further treatment on 12.02.2012, but on the same day, while he was under treatment, he died. Thereafter, the deceased was taken to the residence of the petitioner / 1st accused and was cremated in the electric cremation centre at Govindapuram, Dindigul. The death report was sent