M.K. SUPPUROYAL Vs. ABDUL PARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/sole accused has filed this Criminal Original Petition under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C praying to call for the records in C.C. No. 81 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bodinayakanur and quash the same.

(2.) Heard Mr. M.Kaliraj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.Murugappan, learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is running a hotel in the name and style of 'Saravana Bhavan', at Door No.12/1/63, Opp. to Bodinayakanur Bus Stop in a rented building which along with some more extent of property is originally owned by one V.J. Thomas; that V.J. Thomas died leaving behind 10 persons as his legal heirs including his wife Elizabeth; that V.J.T. Vincent, S/o V.J. Thomas, filed a suit for partition and separate possession in O.S.No.148 of 2014 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Theni wherein the defendant 11 to 26 are arrayed as tenants; that this petitioner is arrayed as 21st defendant therein; that the petitioner and other tenants are depositing the rent in the said Court vide order passed in I.A.No.249 of 2014 in O.S.No.148 of 2014 without any default till date; that Rani D/o V.J. Thomson fraudulently fabricated records and executed a sale deed in favour of the respondent herein vide Doc.No.2561 of 2016; that the plaintiff in O.S.No.148 of 2014 filed W.P.No.3184 of 2017 on the file of this Court wherein interim order of status quo was ordered on 23/2/2017; that on 6/1/2017, the respondent herein and his henchmen attempted to trespass and measure the property; that V.J.T. Vincent filed a police complaint against the respondent and Rani in Crime No.221 of 2017 under Sec. 452, 420, 465, 468, 471 and 506(ii) and the same culminated into C.C.No.488 of 2018 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bodinayakanur; that on 21/6/2017, the respondent herein and his henchmen in the absence of the petitioners, broke open and trespassed into the petitioner's hotel, damaged and stolen the articles therein; that the petitioner lodged a complaint against the respondent and 20 others in Crime No. 627 of 2017 under Sec. 143, 448, 380, 294 (b) and 506(i) of IPC on 27/6/2017 and the same culminated into C.C.No386 of 2018 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bodinayakanur; that the quash petition filed by the respondent was dismissed on 2/1/2019 in CRL.O.P(MD) No. 22706 of 2018 by this Court; that after dismissal of the quash petition, the respondent herein filed a false complaint against the petitioner, suppressing the entire facts and the criminal cases pending against him, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bodinayakanur with malafide intention, vengeance and to grab the property from the petitioner; and that the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bodinayakanur without applying his mind, took cognizance over the complaint for the offences under Sec. 448, 294(b), 506(ii) of IPC, under Sec. 200 of Cr.P.C and ordered summons to the petitioner. He further submitted that as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava's case [Priyanka Srivastava Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in (2015) 6 SCC 287], 156(3) petition should be annexed and filed in the form of affidavit, which is a mandatory provision; that the procedure adopted by the the learned Judicial Magistrate is also not in consonance with the dictum laid down in Priyanka Srivastava's case; and that the respondent's allegations are so absurd and inherently improbable. Accordingly, he prayed to allow the Criminal Original Petition.