Baskar v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18.02.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Crl.O.P.Nos.10006 & 10007 of 2014 and MP.Nos. 1 to 4 of 2014 Baskar

...Petitioner/A1 in Crl.OP.10006/2014

Maheswari

...Petitioner/A2 in Crl.OP.10007/2014

Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu rep by The Inspector of Police, Udumalapet Police Station, Udumalapet, Tirupur District.

...Respondent/complainant

in both Crl.OPs 2.Karuppusamy

...Respondent/Defacto complainant

in both Crl.OPs Prayer: Petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the records in respect of the charge sheet in Cr.No.62 of 2014 pending on the file of the Inspector of Police, Udumalapet Police Station, Tirupur District and quash the same. In both Crl.OPs.

For Petitioner :

Mr.Raghual Balaji For Respondents :

Mr.C.Iyapparaj, APP for R1 :

M/S.V.T.Srinivasa for R2 COMMON ORDER These Criminal original petitions have been filed to call for the records in respect of the charge sheet in Cr.No.62 of 2014, on the file of the Inspector of Police, Udumalapet Police

Station, Tirupur District and quash the same. 2.The case of the prosecution is that a dispute arouse between the landlord and tenant, regarding the possession and enjoyment of the shop situated at Door NO.167/A, C.K.Road, Udumalpet, measuring to an extent of 120 sq.ft and comprised in T.S.No.10/1 Ward No.E, Block No.3. The petitioners are arrayed as A1 and A2 in these cases.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the original complainant one Karuppasamy who is the second respondent herein, is no more and no one is in occupation of the said premises and that the petitioner is now in occupation and further all the litigations against the petitioner, initiated by the said Karuppasamy ended his in favour and, therefore, registering a case against the petitioner is unreasonable one. This Court may permit the petitioner to place all the relevant materials before the law enforcing agency, and on satisfaction the law enforcing agency, may pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a time frame fixed by this Court.

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

6.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.62 of 2014, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving opportunity to the petitioners, for submission of documents in the possession of the petitioners. The petitioners are directed to co-operate with the law enforcing agency for early completion of the investigation.

7.These criminal original petitions are disposed of with the aforesaid directions. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar jrs

To 1.The Inspector of Police, Udumalapet Police Station, Tirupur District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

+1 cc to Mr.R.Parthasarathy, Advocate, S.R.No.13514/20 +2 cc to Mr.D.Thirumoorthy, Advocate, S.R.No.13860 & 13861/20 Crl.O.P.Nos.10006 & 10007 of 2014 and MP.Nos. 1 to 4 of 2014 GP(CO) RN(20/05/2020)