P.CHANDRAN Vs. THE STATE REP.BY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner, praying to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.358 of 2015, pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

(2.) The defacto complainant / 2nd respondent, for development of his business, had approached the first petitioner on 10.05.2012 for a loan of Rs. 25,00,000/- at the rate of 7% interest. As security, the defacto complainant, by way of registered document in Doc.No.3639/2011, dated 28.06.2010, had executed a sale agreement, in favour of the 3rd petitioner. Subsequent to it, another Rs.25,00,000/- had been given as loan, for which, the 2nd respondent's wife had given a power of attorney to the 2nd petitioner / son of the 1st petitioner, as security, by way of a registered Doc.No.936/2012. The 2nd petitioner, using the same, had executed a sale deed in favour of the

(3.) rd petitioner. For the loan of Rs.50,00,000/-, the 2nd respondent had been paying interest upto August, 2013. Using the power of attorney, the 3 rd petitioner had executed a sale deed in favour of the A4, after the power of attorney being cancelled. Despite the defacto complainant paid the entire amount, the petitioners refused the return the document and cancel the power of attorney. Based on the complaint of the defacto complainant, the case came to be registered in Crime No.34 of 2014, for the offences under Sections 420 , 423 r/w 34 of IPC ., and Sections 3 and 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2003. After investigation, final report had been filed, which was taken on file in C.C.No.358 of 2015, by learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the petitioners/Accused 1 to 3 and the second respondent, appeared in persons and their identifications were also verified by this Court, in addition to the confirmation of the identity of the parties by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) through the respondent Police. Learned counsel appearing for the parties also endorsed the identify of their respective parties.