REPORTABLE

2026 INSC 39

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 140 OF 2026

[ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CRL.) NO. 397 OF 2025]

C.S. PRASAD … APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

C. SATYAKUMAR AND OTHERS ... RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The present Appeal arises out of the impugned order dated 22.10.2024 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras, ‘High Court’ in Crl.O.P. No. 10961 of 2023 filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, ‘Cr.PC’ whereby the High Court had proceeded to quash the proceedings against respondent Nos. 1 to 3 herein in C.C. No. 2 of 2023 arising out of FIR No. 229 of 2021 registered for offences under Sections 417, 420, 465, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 18603 on the file of the learned Special Metropolitan Magistrate-I, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Land Grabbing

Cases, Allikulam, Egmore, Chennai.

Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by

MINI

Date: 2026.01.09

Reason:

3 ‘IPC’

3. The appellant herein is Dr. C.S. Prasad, the de-facto complainant, whereas the accused persons are Dr. C. Satyakumar, Dr. Swarnakumari (wife of Dr. C. Satyakumar) and Shri S. Ravi Chitturi (their son), who are respondent Nos. 1 to 3 respectively in this Appeal. Dr. Ranjith Chittoori, who is respondent No. 5 herein, is the nephew of respondent No. 1 and the appellant.

FACTUAL MATRIX

4. The record discloses that the present criminal proceedings arise out of a dispute rooted in the execution of three registered settlement deeds concerning valuable immovable properties situated in Chennai, originally owned by Late Dr. C. Satyanarayana and his wife Late Smt. C. Lakshmi Devi. The couple had three sons, namely, respondent No. 1 (elder son), the appellant herein, and Dr. C. Ranga Rao, who predeceased them in the year 2011. Dr. Ranjith Chittoori is the son of the predeceased Dr. C. Ranga Rao, and nephew of respondent No. 1 and the appellant.

5. During their lifetime, Late Dr. C. Satyanarayana and Late Smt. C. Lakshmi Devi are said to have executed three registered settlement deeds in respect of different properties. The first settlement deed was executed on 31.12.2010 bearing Document No. 2701 of 2010, settling property bearing R.S. Nos. 376/2 and 376/3 Part, Egmore village, Door No. 192, Poonamallee High Road, Chennai, in favour of their elder son, respondent No. 1. Thereafter, a second settlement deed came to be executed on 14.02.2012, registered as Document No. 535 of 2012, in respect of Plot No. 2441, T.S. No.384, Block No.I-D, Anna Nagar, Chennai. Subsequently, a third settlement deed was executed on 30.03.2012, registered as Document No. 707 of 2012, in respect of Door No.57, New Avadi Road, Kilpauk, Chennai-10.

6. In the interregnum, on 28.03.2012, Late Dr. C. Satyanarayana executed a Power of Attorney, ‘PoA’ in favour of respondent No. 1, authorising him to present documents for registration. The third settlement deed dated 30.03.2012 was accordingly presented for registration through the said PoA holder. Shortly thereafter, Late Dr. C. Satyanarayana passed away on 18.04.2012, followed by the demise of his wife Late Smt. C. Lakshmi Devi on

22.04.2012.

7. Two years later, in 2014, respondent No. 5 instituted O.S. No. 2190 of 2014 before the learned II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, seeking declaration that the three settlement deeds dated 31.12.2010, 14.02.2012 and 30.03.2012 were null and void, along with a prayer for partition and separate possession of the properties. The appellant was arrayed as defendant No. 2 in the said suit and had entered appearance. However, the record reflects that he did not actively contest the proceedings and allowed the matter to proceed ex parte against him.

8. During the pendency of civil proceedings, the appellant lodged a Police complaint on 08.01.2020, alleging fraud, impersonation and forgery in the execution of the settlement deeds. After preliminary inquiry, the Police closed the complai