E.SAMPATH KUMAR Vs. THE STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original petition has been filed praying to quash the proceedings in CC.No.477 of 2025 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate-II, Chengalpet.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that, pursuant to the complaint lodged by the second respondent, the first respondent registered an FIR in Crime No.2 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Ss. 447, 463, 464, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 506(i) of the IPC on the allegation that the accused fabricated certain documents and projected the same as the original parent deeds and, on the strength of such fabricated documents, executed a sale deed in favour of the sixth accused in respect of the property comprised in Survey No.465/8, measuring an extent of 10 cents of house plot, and the property comprised in Survey No.465/9, measuring an extent of 30 cents, situated at Mamandur Village, Mamandur Taluk, Chengalpattu District.

(3.) It is the further case of the prosecution that the second respondent had obtained a power of attorney under a registered sale deed dtd. 9/9/2011, registered as Document No.1178 of 2011, from the original owners, namely, Parthasarathy and Ranganathan, authorising him to deal with the subject property. The said Parthasarathy and Ranganathan had purchased the subject property under a registered sale deed dtd. 11/5/2005, registered as Document No.4105 of 2005, from one Maimun Thara, and had also obtained Patta No.505 in respect of the said property. The said Maimun Thara had, in turn, purchased the subject property under a sale deed registered as Document No.295 of 1975 from one Kathija Beebi. The said Kathija Beebi had purchased the subject property under a registered sale deed dated 1963, registered as Document No.585 of 1963. Thus, according to the prosecution, accused Nos.1 to 7 had no right, title or interest over the subject property and, by fabricating certain documents and created an encumbrance over the property by executing a sale deed in favour of the sixth accused on 5/12/2007. On receipt of the complaint, the first respondent registered the aforesaid FIR. After completion of the investigation, a final report was filed, and the same was taken cognizance by the learned Trial Court.