ORIGINAL PETITION 37 of 2012 on 27 April 2000

1. State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Sathuvachari, Vellore (Crime No.37/2012)

2. M.Dhamodaran

PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition has been filed underSection 482 of Criminal procedure Code, praying to call for therecords in Crime No.37 of 2012 on the file of the 1[st] respondentpolice and quash the First Information Report against thepetitioner herein.

When the matter came up for hearing on 22.11.2018, thelearned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that therespondent Police completed the investigation and will file afinal report within a period of three months. Recording thesame, this Criminal Original Petition was closed.

2. Subsequently, the learned counsel for the petitioner madea mention before this Court and submitted that the entirecriminal proceedings are abuse of process of law and variousimportant facts and the documents were not brought to the notice of this Court. While passing the order, the learned counselsubmitted that the case was projected as if the petitioner hadprepared fake patta and is claiming right over the property andthe same needs to be investigated by the police. The learnedcounsel submitted that a glance at the unimpeachable documentsthat have been filed before this Court clearly show that theentire criminal proceedings are an abuse of process of law.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to thenotice of this Court the proceedings by the RDO, Ranipet, dated21.03.1999 wherein the patta that was granted in favour ofsubsequent purchasers viz., Vadivel and K.Balakrishnan wascancelled. This order was subsequently confirmed in appeal bythe DRO, Vellore. Subsequently, the said Balakrishnan died andhis legal heirs viz., Indira and two others claimed that theproperty belongs to them and also filed a suit in O.S.No.18 of2005 before the Sub Court, (Wakf's Tribunal), Vellore againstthe Wakf.

4. While so, the petitioner, who is the Hereditary Muthawallifor the said properties, filed a suit seeking for bareinjunction in O.S.No.130 of 2000 against Nawab Ali Khan andothers and an order of interim injunction was also granted by anorder dated 27.04.2000 and the application itself was allowed byan order dated 29.08.2002.

5. The learned counsel by pointing out the above proceedingssubmitted that the defacto complainant who claims to have takena power of attorney from the legal heirs of Balakrishnan, hasnow preferred the present complaint, based on which, an FIR hasbeen registered by the respondent police.

6. This Court carefully considered the submissions made oneither side and also materials placed on record.

7. In view of the fact that the patta that was granted infavour of the subsequent purchasers through whom the presentlegal heirs are claiming right was cancelled and the entireissue is at large before the competent Civil Court, the presentFIR that was registered by the respondent police is nothing butan abuse of process of law. Till the rights of the parties aredetermined before the competent Civil Court, there is noquestion of any creation of false documents and cheatingcommitted by the petitioner. This important factor was notnoticed at the time of closing this Criminal Original Petition.

8. Since this Court did not pass any orders on merits,Section 362 of Cr.P.C. will not come into play and this orderwill not amount to reviewing the earlier order passed by thisCourt. In view of the above, the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the earlier order passed by this Court on22.11.2018, is recalled.9.In the result, the First Information Report inCrl.O.P.No.37 of 2012 on the file of the respondent Police, ishereby quashed and accordingly, this Criminal Original Petitionis allowed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar

//True Copy//

kal

Sub Assistant Registrar

To1. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Sathuvachari, Vellore.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

+1 cc to Mr.P.M.Duraiswamy, Advocate Sr.No.12983

VD(CO)CSL/07.03.2019

Crl.O.P.No.2133 of 2014&Crl.M.P.No.2148 of 2019