Criminal proceedings can be quashed under S.482 CrPC when an FIR is filed after an unexplained significant delay and the accused is implicated based on mere suspicion rather than evidence or presence at the scene, rendering the prosecution an abuse of the court's process.

Order

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR No.248/2023 dated 29.06.2023 on the file of the 1^st respondent Police.

2.On the complaint lodged by the 2^nd respondent, the 1^st respondent registered an FIR in Crime No.248/2023 on the file of the 1^st respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 457 and 380 of IPC, alleging that on 29.06.2023, the accused entered into the house of the 2^nd respondent and stole the Lease Agreement along with Statement of Accounts and silver articles. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2 in the FIR registered by the 1^st respondent and she has been falsely implicated in this case. Already two FIRs have been registered as against the petitioner for the very same occurrence on the file of different Police Stations. Therefore, the present FIR that has been falsely filed, is only as against the landlord who belongs to one political party. The petitioner was being the President of Village and also belongs to the same political party. Therefore, she has also been implicated as accused. Even according to the prosecution and on seeing the CCTV footage, it is revealed that the persons were engaged by the petitioners and others to steal the Lease Agreement and other documents. The CCTV footage did not show the petitioner’s presence anywhere. Therefore, the present FIR is an abuse of process of law. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that already investigation has been completed in two other FIRs. The CCTV footage clearly shows that the persons have been engaged by the petitioner involved in the crime. Therefore, the 1^st respondent has rightly registered an FIR as against the petitioner.

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the available material on record.

5.The petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.2. Even according to the prosecution, on seeing the CCTV footage on 13.06.2023, the same accused found stealing the documents from the house of the 2^nd respondent and they were engaged by the petitioner and others. However, there is absolutely no CCTV footage to show that the petitioner was also present at the scene of occurrence at that time. Admittedly, the petitioner belongs to one political party and she was the President of Pooluvapatti Village. The accused No.4 and 5 are Landlords of the said premises and the 2^nd respondent has been inducted as tenant. The petitioner is in no way connected with the landlords or the tenant. Since the petitioner belongs to the same political party and she was the President of a Panchayat, she has been roped into the occurrence. Further, the alleged theft occurred on 13.06.2023 as if the said premises was broke open from the said property. However, the complaint was only lodged on 29.06.2023. No prudent persons would keep quiet for 16 days after claiming stolen articles from the premises. Therefore, it is only an after thought to implicate the petitioner as an accused as alleged in the complaint. In fact, even after seeking the CCTV footage, the 2^nd respondent recognised that the persons who were present in the premises are henchmen. Therefore, he suspected that the petitioner might have been involved in the incident. The alleged offence had taken place on 13.06.2023. Therefore, the FIR registered against the petitioner is an abuse of process of law.

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the FIR filed in Crime No.248 of 2023 dated 29.06.2023 on the file of the 1^st respondent Police is hereby quashed as against the petitioner. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.