SIVANANDA RAJA AND OTHERS Vs. MALARVIZHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, seeking an order to call for the records in C.C. No. 447 of 2001 pending on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Sirkali and quash the same.

(2.) It is an admitted fact that the respondent herein has filed a Suit along with her husband in O.S. No. 30 of 2000 on the file of the District Munsif, Sirkali, seeking permanent injunction against the petitioners 1 to 3 herein and two others. In the copy of the Complaint, the petitioner has stated in paragraph number 6 that in the suit property, there was a superstructure, that was dilapidated, hence, the plaintiffs removed the same and the same is kept vacant as a house site, however, it was being enjoyed by the respondent and her husband, who are the plaintiffs in the Suit. It is seen that the Suit was filed in the month of March 2000, however, in the Complaint given under Sec. 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, before the Judicial Magistrate, Sirkali in C.C. No. 447 of 20001 at paragraph number 7, the respondent herein has stated that after the order was passed by the learned District Munsif, Sirkali on 30.04.2001, the petitioners herein trespassed into the property on 10.05.2001, demolished the superstructure of the house, having thatched roof and damaged meter box and wire. Based on the Complaint, the case in Cr. No. 373 of 2001 was registered by the Aanaikaranchatiram Police Station under Sections 147, 448, 427, 379, 188 and 506(i), IPC.

(3.) Mr. A. Muthukumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that there is no prima facie case made out against the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused in the case. Though in the Complaint, the respondent has stated that the residential thatched house was delabitated, hence, the superstructure was already removed and kept as vacant site. In the Criminal Complaint, contrary to the Plaint averments, he has stated that the petitioners herein have trespassed into the property and demolished the super structure, having thatched roof and also a meter box, which is a self-contrary and false version. In the Civil Suit, no injunction was granted by the District Munsif, Sirkali, but both parties were directed to maintain the status quo. Had there been any violation, the respondent could have filed only a Petition for contempt against the persons, who have violated the order of the Civil Court. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, based on a false Complaint, the Criminal Case was registered by the Court below.