B.MIRUTHULA Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above petitions are to quash the final report filed under Ss. 120 B, 420. 467, 468, 471, 109 and 447 IPC.

(2.) It is alleged in the final reports that the petitioner's father, one Balasumbramani had acquired 81.5 cents by virtue of a partition deed in the year 1997; that he had sold 31.38 cents of land to the de facto complainant in Crl.O.P.No.1914 of 2021 and sold 17.58 cents to the de facto complainant in Crl.OP.No.2235 of 2021; that thereafter, in a conspiracy with the other accused, he had executed a sale deed in favour of his wife A.4. In the said sale deed, the petitioner and her father are shown as vendors; that the petitioner and others had forged the Adangal Register where they had added the name of the petitioner's father in the column, showing the name of the owner, along with the name of one Chinnaswamy making it appear that they both were the owners of the lands in the said Survey Number; and that the petitioner therefore executed these documents in conspiracy with the other accused and hence, guilty of the offences alleged.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has a right by birth in the property that was allotted in favour of her father in the partition deed. Her father had executed the sale deed by unlawfully selling her share in favour of the de facto complainants. Since the petitioner's father had not obtained permission from the Court to sell the property belonging to the petitioner, in the year 2004, who was then a minor, the said sale deed is voidable at the instance of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner had filed a suit in OS.No.449 of 2017 on the file of the Principal Sub-Judge, Erode, to set aside the sale deeds executed in the favour of the de facto complainants. The learned counsel, therefore, submitted that the dispute of a civil nature has been given a criminal colour. Since the sale deed executed by her father in the year 2004 was voidable, she had a right to execute a sale deed and hence, the sale deeds executed in favour of her mother, A.4 and the other accused cannot be said to be a criminal act.