R.BALAKRISHNAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Courts below dismissing the discharge petition filed by the petitioner and the same being confirmed in revision by the Sessions Court.

(2.) The respondent Police registered an FIR in Cr.No.719 of 2001, against the petitioner for the alleged offences under Sections 406 , 409 and 120(b) IPC, based on the complaint given by one Damodaran Chettiar, who is the Secretary of the Balija Chetti Association. The allegation made in the complaint is that the petitioner has misappropriated the funds belonging to the Trust. This FIR was investigated, and a final report was also filed against the petitioner and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.4133 of 2004, by the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai. The petitioner filed a petition for discharge and the same was dismissed by the learned Magistrate by an order dated 09.02.2015. This order was confirmed in revision by the XVI Additional City Civil Court, Chennai, by an order dated 26.04.2016.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that similar complaints were filed earlier by three persons viz; Jayaraman, Parthasarathy and Damodaran and based on all the complaints, cases in Cr.Nos.435/2003, 656/2007 and Cr.No.96/2004 were registered against the petitioner. All these cases ended by filing of the closure report by the Police, as mistake of fact and that the cases are Civil in nature. A protest petition was filed by the de facto complainant and the same was dismissed, and subsequently it was confirmed by this Court in Crl.R.C.Nos.447/2007, 360/2006 and Crl.R.C.No.913 of 2011. Therefore, the learned counsel would submit that the present proceedings based on the very same set of facts, cannot be permitted to be prosecuted and the same will amount to an abuse of process of Court.