Munusamy vs. R. Murugesan

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:08.07.2011

CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

Criminal Original Petition (MD) No.5186 Of 2011 and M.P.(MD) Nos.1 and 2 of 2011

1.Munusamy

2.Balasubramaniam :Petitioners/Accused

-Vs-

1.R.Murugesan

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, District Crime Branch, Karur, Karur District. :Respondents/Defacto Complainant and Complainant

This petition is preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C to praying to call for the records relating to the charge Sheet in C.C.No.11 of 2011 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.M.Vallinayagam For 1st Respondent: No Appearance For 2nd Respondent: Mrs.Prabha, Government Advocate

ORDER

This quash petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking to quash the charge sheet filed in C.C.No.11 of 2011, pending on the file of Court of Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur.

2.The respondent No.1 herein filed a complaint in Crime No.13 of 2010 for the alleged offences under Sections 143, 147, 465, 468 and 506(i) I.P.C. After investigation and after examination of the witnesses, a charge sheet was filed by the second respondent, which has been taken on file by the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur. Challenging the said charge sheet filed in C.C.No.11 of 2011, the petitioner herein has come forward to file this Criminal Original Petition.

3.It is seen that the first petitioner herein claims to be the owner of the property. The second petitioner claims to be the tenant. A power of attorney has been executed by the first petitioner on 27.03.2006 in favour of one R.Thangavel. Based upon the said power of attorney the respondent No.1 has purchased the property.

4. The first petitioner thereafter cancelled the power of diamattorney executed by him. Therefore, alleging that the cancellation of power of attorney is illegal, the respondent WEB $\frac{Ca_1c_2}{N_0.1}$ has given the complaint by also stating that his possession has been disturbed forcibly by the petitioners. Therefore, based upon the same the complaint has been given, which has been taken on file in C.C.No.11 of 2011.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that suit has been filed by the petitioners against the the respondent No.1 and the petitioners are in possession $\quad\text{and}\quad$ enjoyment of the property in dispute. The complaint has been given by the first respondent as a counter-blast to the suit. If the trial is allowed to be proceeded, the suit filed by the petitioners would be very much affected.

6.A perusal of the charges framed would show that the petitioners have been charge sheeted under Sections 465, 468, 471 and 506(i) I.P.C. It is the specific case of the respondent No.1 that his possession was sought to be disturbed by force by the petitioners. It has been further averred in the complaint that there is a threat to the life of the respondent No. $\overline{1}$ . The question as to whether the offences alleged against the petitioners are made out or not can only be decided after the trial. Therefore, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the charge sheet taken on file.

this Criminal Original 7.Accordingly, Petition is dismissed. However, taking into consideration of the fact that the petitioner has filed a suit in O.S.No.523 of 2009 on the file of the District Munsif, Karur and the same is pending trial, a direction is issued to the District Munsif Court, Karur to dispose of O.S.No.523 of 2009 within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The registry is directed to mark a copy of this order to the District Munsif Court, Karur. Consequently, connected M.P. (MD) Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 are dismissed.

$Sd/-$ Assistant Registrar (Records)

/ TRUE COPY /

Sub Assistant Registrar

To:1. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur.

2. The District Munsif, Karur.

3. The Public Prosecutor,

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+1CC to Mr.M.Vallinayagam, Advocate. SR.No.22400.

Si

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

RP/19.07.2011/2P/5C.

Criminal Original Petition(MD)No.5186 Of 2011 and M.P. (MD) Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 08.07.2011.