S.P. VELAYUTHAM Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above Criminal Original Petition has been preferred under Sec. 482 of Crimial P.C. seeking to quash the F.I.R. in Crime No. 41 of 2009, on the file of the 1st respondent police, wherein the petitioners have been arrayed as 1st and 2nd accused for alleged commission of offences under Sections 120-B, 465, 466, 467, 468 read with 420, 109, 471, IPC, based on the complaint preferred by one, D. Gopichandran, on behalf of five different companies viz., the respondents 2 to 6.

(2.) The criminal law has been set in motion by the said D. Gopichandran, as a power of attorney agent of the respondents 2 to 6, who are in turn the power agents of various individuals claiming to be the owners of a vast extent of land at Alandur Village, Kancheepuram District. The present complaint has been preferred as against the petitioners herein (1st and 2nd accused) and four others, alleging that a sale deed, a settlement deed and agreements were executed by them with respect to the above said land, without having any right or title over the said land. It appears that the respondents 2 to 6 have mortgaged the said land to Indian Bank, who had later assigned the mortgage in favour of Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. (ARCIL), which has been impleaded in this original petition as the 7th respondent.

(3.) I heard the learned senior counsel, Mr. R. Krishnamurthy and Mr. V. Raghavachari, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. P. Rajarathinam, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the 1st respondent, Assisted by Mr. P. Govindarajan, learned Additional Public prosecutor, Mr. N. Ramakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 6 and the learned senior counsel Mr. Aravind Pandian, appearing for the 7th respondent. Perused the voluminous documents produced on behalf each parties, including the case dairy submitted by the 1st respondent police.