JENIN MON Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) The petitioner herein is the 1st accused in Crime No.2513 of 2017 of the Perumbavoor Police Station, registered on a private complaint filed by the additional 2nd respondent. He is accused of having committed offence punishable under Sections 379, 406, 420, 409, 441 r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.

(3.) According to the de facto complainant, a functional crusher unit owned by the petitioner, situated in a property having an extent of 30.35 Ares and run in the name and style as 'Perumbavoor Aggregates' was taken on lease by the de facto complainant. The terms were reduced into an agreement which is dated 30.2015. A sum of Rs.1.25 Crores was also received by the petitioner towards security. The monthly rent was Rs.2.5 Lakhs and the lease period was 11 months. After the expiry of the said period, on 10.10.2015, a fresh agreement was executed. The security deposit was enhanced by a sum of Rs.40 lakhs. It was also agreed that the amount, which was paid by way of security, would be returned within a period of 8 months without interest. Though the period of lease expired on 29.2.2016, the petitioner did not come forward and repay the security deposit. The de facto complainant continued to occupy the crusher unit and carried out its operation by paying the agreed rent. Finally on 20.6.2017, Annexure-E agreement was entered into between the parties. As per the terms of the agreement, the petitioner agreed to pay the entire amount accepted by way of security within a period of one year, out of which, Rs.75 lakhs was to be paid within a period of 6 months. The de facto complainant was permitted to operate the crusher unit for a period of 6 months, within which period, the petitioner was bound to arrange another tenant and mobilise Rs.75 lakhs from him towards repayment of the security and clear off the dues towards the de facto complainant. However, on 21.6.2017, that is on the next day of executing Annexure-E agreement, the petitioner herein illegally trespassed into the property and removed the machineries worth Rs.40 lakhs without his knowledge or consent and thus, caused wrongful loss to him. It is on these allegations that the Crime was registered.