R.Tikkaram v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.12.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI CRL.O.P.NO.21685 OF 2010 1.R.Tikkaram 2.R.Ranganathan 3.Kiruba @ Kirubanantham 4.S.Kandasamy 5.S.Murugadoss 6.R.Govindarajulu ... Petitioners Vs.

1.

State Represented by The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch Thiruvallur District 2.

S.Jayachandran 3.

Rani ... Respondents Prayer:

Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the records of FIR No.30 of 2010 pending on the file of the respondent police and quash the above first information report. For Petitioners : M/s.Raji and Rajan For Respondents : Mr.C.Iyyapparaj, APP for R1

O R D E R

The matter is listed today without E.B.

2.This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records of FIR No.30 of 2010 pending on the file of the respondent police and quash the above first information report. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the defacto complainant is the legal heir of Bommiammal, who had executed a Registered Will in the year 1996 in respect of the disputed land and subsequently died in the

year 2002. The family members of the defacto complainants including the defacto complainant entered into a registered partition deed. Thereafter, without any right, the 1st petitioner fabricated a fake will and settled the same in favour of the 2nd petitioner herein and the 2nd petitioner subsequently encumbered the said property in favour of the 5th respondent herein. Thereby, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the respondent police and a case has been registered for the offence under Section 465, 467, 468 and 474 of Indian Panel Code. Thereafter, three accused were enlarged on bail and other accused enlarged on anticipatory bail. Hence, the petitioners are before this court challenging the said FIR. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would further submit that, it would suffice, if this Court permits the petitioners to furnish the particulars before the law enforcing agency to prove their innocence and issue direction to the law enforcing agency to complete the investigation within a time frame.

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor concedes to the request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and on instructions, he would further submit that the investigation will be completed within the time frame fixed by this Court.

5.Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, this Court without going into the merits of the case, is inclined to issue direction to the law enforcing agency to complete the investigation in Crime No.30 of 2010, after giving opportunity to the petitioners, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioners are directed to co-operate with the law enforcing agency for early completion of the investigation.

6.This criminal original petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition if any is also closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar kas

To 1.

The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch Thiruvallur District.

2.

The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras Chennai 600 104.

+1cc to M/s.Raji and Rajan, Advocate, S.R.No.104768 Crl.O.P.No.21685 of 2010 RGN(CO) CS/30/01/2020