JAYAPAUL MOHAN Vs. STATE REP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed to call for the records of First Information Report filed in Crime No.1075/2016 dated 02.12.2016, which is pending on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant/Kumar Baral had lodged a complaint to the respondent police on 27.11.2016. The petitioner, who is the neighbour of the defacto complainant, had picked up quarrel with the defacto complainant, questioning the stone pillars kept in his place. The defacto complainant explained that these stone pillars are kept in his place and the petitioner has no right in questioning the same. Though the defacto complainant explained about the stones kept in his place, the petitioner abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and started to break the fencing pole. While so, one of the pole fell on the head of the petitioner/accused. At that time, the petitioner/accused took one brick and hit the defacto complainant on his chest. Thereafter, the accused ran away from the scene of occurrence. The defacto complainant informed about the incident to the Sub-Inspector of police, who visited the scene of occurrence, registered a case against the petitioner. Prior to the occurrence, the accused had come to the place of the defacto complainant and abused in filthy language. Thereafter, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint. Initially, C.S.R was assigned and after enquiry, FIR was registered on 02.12.2016 for offence under Sections 294(b), 336 and 427 IPC.

(3.) The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner son's purchased a property at No.88D, Defence Colony, Muthaputhupet, Chennai, to an extent of 1620 sq.ft but there was 1890 sq.ft of land available with constructed residential building having built up area about 526 sq.ft , through a registered document No.4238 of 2016 at SRO, Avadi dated 12.04.2016. The defacto complainant/second respondent is the neighbour of the said property, encroaching upon the petitioner son's land and attempting to put up the fence. On 19.11.2016, the second respondent trespassed into the property, demolished the compound wall and cut down fully grown coconut tree. Therefore, the petitioner lodged a complaint with the respondent police on the same day and C.S.R.No.495 of 2016 was given. However, no action was taken by the respondent police. Hence, the petitioner filed a civil suit before the District Munsif Court, Ambattur in O.S.No.48 of 2016 and I.A.No.1987 of 2016 seeking injunction restraining the second respondent and his men claiming any right over the petitioner son's property. On 23.12.2016, the District Munsif Court granted injunction order against the second respondent. Thereafter, on 27.11.2016, the petitioner visited his son's residence, and informed the second respondent about the injunction order of the Civil Court. The second respondent got outraged and attacked the petitioner with stone on his head. Thereafter, the petitioner fell down, sustained injuries. Immediately, he was taken to Avadi Government Hospital for treatment, where he was referred to Stanley Hospital, Chennai and he took treatment as in-patient from 28.11.2016 to 02.12.2016. He was referred to Ortho, Neuro and ENT Department. From the hospital, information was sent to the respondent Police, who visited the hospital, recorded the statement of the petitioner and a case in Crime No.1076 of 2016 was registered against the second respondent/defacto complainant for offence under Sections 294(b), 323 IPC. On completion of investigation, charge sheet filed in C.C.No.381 of 2017, which is pending trial before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur. The second respondent/defacto complainant, to escape from the assault made on the petitioner and violating the injunction order of the Civil Court, had lodged a false complaint against the petitioner . Hence he prayed for quashing of the complaint.