The High Court, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., cannot quash criminal proceedings by conducting a mini-trial to evaluate the truthfulness of evidence or resolve disputed questions of fact; such matters must remain within the purview of the trial court.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.B.Kumarasamy

For Respondent(s): Mr.L.Baskaran

Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1

Mr.S.Nagarajan for R2

ORDER

This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.313 of 2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Special Court for Land Grabbing Cases, Tiruppur, thereby taken cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 120B , 467, 468, 471, 420 of IPC & 82(d) of the Registration Act, 1908 as against the petitioner.

2. The case of the prosecution is that originally the land to an extent of 13.83 acres comprised in S.F.Nos.503/6, 506/1, 518/4 & 518/5 situated at Narayanapuram Village, Palladam, Tiruppur District belongs to one Palanisamy Gounder and he purchased the subject property from one Arunachala Chettiar vide registered document No.3050 of 1959 dated 16.07.1959. The said Palanisamy Gounder was having two wives namely, Parathal and Rasammal. The first wife had four children namely, Subbathal, Valliammal, Subramani & Chinnasamy and the second wife had also four children namely Rukmani, Selvi, Amirthavalli & Selvaraj. The said Subramani born through the first wife had two wives namely Vijaya and Vasanthi. The first wife Vijaya executed a release-cum-divorce deed dated 15.04.1980 by which, she will not claim ownership over any property that belongs to her husband Subramani and had also given consent for his second marriage. The said document was registered in document No.8 of 1980.

3. Thereafter, on 25.09.1990, there was a partition between the children of Palanisamy Gounder born through his two wives vide registered document No.2690 of 1990. On the very same day, the female children born through the two wives had executed a release deed in favour of their brothers under document No.81 of 1990. On 03.01.1991, the said Subramani executed a Will in favour of his second wife Vasanthi in respect of his share vide doucment No.2 of 1991 and died on 18.02.1991. On 15.03.2007, the said Vasanthi executed a Power of Attorney in favour of one Duraisamy vide document No.525 of 2007. On 13.08.2007, the power agent Duraisamy executed a sale deed in favour of one Ponnusamy vide document No.3393 of 2007.

4. In the meantime, on 17.07.2007, another son Chinnasamy and his legal heirs had executed a Power of Attorney in favour of one Ganapathiappan in respect of their property vide document No.755 of 2007. The purchaser Ponnusamy and power agent Ganapathiappan developed the land to an extent of 1.33 ½ cents and plotted out the same into 19 plots under the name and style of Deepak Nagar. On 08.07.2009, the defacto complainant purchased the property to an extent of 2318 ¾ sq.ft., in his wife name Dhanalakshmi vide document No.8765 of 2009.

5. While being so, on 21.02.2005, the first accused viz., Vijaya, who is none other than the first wife of the said Subramani had purchased a stamp paper and entered into an agreement for sale with the second accused viz., the petitioner herein in respect of 68 cents in S.F.No.518/4 for the total sale considered of Rs.90,000/- and received a sum of Rs.75,000/- as advance. Thereafter, the first accused failed to execute the sale deed and as such, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.1100 of 2008 on the file of the learned Principal District Munisf, Coimbatore, for specific performance. The said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner and the Court had executed a sale deed and the same registered vide