Madras High Court
Mr.A.K.Muthusamy vs The State Represented By on 24 June, 2022
Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Crl.R.C.No.897 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.06.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
Crl.R.C.No.897 of 2021
Mr.A.K.Muthusamy ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
Central Crime Branch, Unit-I,
Vepery, Chennai-7.
2.B.Jayaraman ... Respondents
(2nd respondent impleaded as
per order 25.03.2022 in Crl.M.P.No.3969 of 2022
in Crl.R.C.No.897 of 2021)
Prayer: Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 r/w. 401 of
Cr.P.C., to call for the records and set aside the order in Crl.M.P.No.6599
of 2019 in C.C.No.4345 of 2018 dated 28.04.2021 on the file of the
CCB/CBCID Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sounderrajan
For 1st Respondent : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
For 2nd Respondent : Mr.V.Srinivasa Babu
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.897 of 2021
ORDER
This revision case is filed aggrieved by the order of the learned CCB/CBCID Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai, dated 28.04.2021 in Crl.M.P.No.6599 of 2019 in C.C.No.4345 of 2018, whereby, the prayer of the petitioner to discharge him from the case has been rejected by the trial Court.
2. Mr.M.Sounderrajan, learned counsel for the petitioner taking the complaint as well as the statement of LW1 would submit that it is a case where A3 and A4 are alleged to have entered into an agreement of sale of the property originally belonged to the mother of the petitioner herein, but, however, acquired by the Housing Board. The agreement itself clearly shows that the property is re-conveyed by the Housing Board, then it conveyed to the petitioner. This apart, even the said agreement was not entered into by A1 to the defacto complainant, it is only A3 and A4 have entered into an agreement. The only role alleged to have been played by the petitioner is that he has got a sum of Rs.20,00,000/-.
2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.897 of 2021
3. Admittedly, even the statement of the Bank Manager says that the Demand Draft / Cheque was not encashed and therefore, the said allegation that the petitioner has received a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- on the face of it, erroneous. He would submit that when the petitioner has not mis-represented anything about his title and neither they had entered into any agreement nor they have created any false document and the offences as alleged under Sections 420, 465, 467,468 and 471 of IPC are all not made out and therefore, the trial Court ought to have discharged the petitioner from the case.
4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that apart from Rs.20,00,000/-, the case of the prosecution is that there is a conspiracy between parties that they have shared whatever the sum they received from the defacto complainant and the petitioner's contention that he has not actually received the said amount and A3 and A4 alone have received the said sum has to be proved only during trial and it is not a case for discharge.
3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.897 of 2021
5. The learned counsel for the defacto complainant would submit that even though it is a fact that they had represented that the land has been acquired by the Housing Board, but on the same strength, in the original agreement entered into between the petitioner, A3 and A4, it is also mentioned that they have got possession which is not a correct fact and therefore, there is also an erroneous representation. In any event, the learned counsel would also submit that given the nature of the facts, once the parties failed to return the money, there is a prima-facie material for prosecution for the offence under Section 420 IPC.
6. Considering the rival submission made by the learned counsel on either side, eventhough I am in agreement with the learned counsel for the petitioner that prima-facie they have not made any mis- representation of the title and they did not directly obtain any money from the defacto complainant, but, however, as contended by the learned Government Advocate, and the learned counsel for the defacto complainant, there is a prima-facie material, wherein, the list of witnesses have spoken about the conspiracy and non-repayment and sharing of money. In that view of the matter, the said fact has to be 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.897 of 2021 proved / disproved only during trial. The petitioner has to raise all the grounds including the points raised in the discharge application only during the trial.
7. This Criminal Revision Case is dismissed on the following terms:-
i) The order in Crl.M.P.No.6599 of 2019 in C.C.No.4345 of 2018 dated 28.04.2021 on the file of the CCB/CBCID Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai, is upheld.
ii) The petitioner is at liberty to raise all the grounds raised in the discharge application at the time of framing of charges and also during trial and the same shall be duly taken into account by the trial Court.
iii) It is made clear that the trial Court will thereafter decide the case in accordance with law without being influenced by any of the observation made by this Court by dismissing the discharge application.
iv) The learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the appearance 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.897 of 2021 of the petitioner may be dispensed with. Considering this prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, appearance of the petitioner in C.C.No.4345 of 2018 is dispensed with except for the necessary hearings and the petitioner shall appear without fail for the necessary hearings.
24.06.2022 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No ssn 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.897 of 2021 To
1. The CCB/CBCID Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai.
2. The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Unit-I, Vepery, Chennai-7.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.No.897 of 2021 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J., ssn Crl.R.C.No.897 of 2021 24.06.2022 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis