MANOJ KUMAR LULLA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the above Criminal Original Petition No. 16209 of 2007 to call for the Records in FIR in Crime No 3 of 2007 dated 14. 5. 2007 on the file of the 1st Respondent and quash the same.

(2.) THE petitioner submitted in his complaint that he has received a notice dated 29. 5. 2007 addressed to his late father, and himself, from the Inspector of police, Economic Offenses Wing St. Thomas Mount, Chennai, dated 28. 5. 2007 under sections 160 and 91 Cr. P. C. The petitioner was asked to appear before the first respondent on 31. 5. 2007 at 10. 30 a. m. The notice required that the petitioner and his late father to bring the following documents namely (a) any agreement between the petitioner and his father on one side and the 2nd respondent on the other (b) cheque, DD and partnership dead.

(3.) AFTER the receipt of the first Respondent's notice, the petitioner was represented by his counsel before the first respondent. Then it was found that the FIR had been lodged by the second Respondent before the first Respondent accusing the petitioner and his late father for offences under Sections 420 and 506 (2) of I. P. C.