C.Saravanan v. State By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.12.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA 1.C.Saravanan 2.Vineet Relia ...
Petitioners versus 1.State by:
The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Team IV, EDF-II, Vepery, Chennai-7.
(Crime No.62 of 2019) 2.Nirmala Emmanuel ...
Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, praying to call for the records in F.I.R.No.62 of 2019 on the file of the respondent and quash the same as against these petitioners.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.C.Paul Kanagaraj For Respondent No.1 : Mr.A.Damodaran Additional Public Prosecutor For Respondent No.2 : Mr.S.Abubacker Sidhic 1/6
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the F.I.R. in Crime No.62 of 2019 on the file of the first respondent police. 2.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners; learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the first respondent and the learned counsel for the second respondent / de facto complainant. 3.
The petitioners are the accused nos.1 and 4 in a case registered in Crime No.62 of 2019 on the file of the first respondent police; the first accused is the Manager under the second accused /builder; the third accused is the Managing Director of SARE Home Projects Services Pvt. Ltd. who had assured to build row houses for the purchasers; the de facto complainant is one such purchaser; the third accused has acted as a nodal agent between the Bank and the builder for arranging loans for the purchase of houses; the de facto complainant has given a complaint by alleging that after she has obtained the sale consideration in respect of a row house booked by her, the accused did not continue the construction work and left it 2/6
in the midway; the second respondent/de facto complainant had availed a bank loan for the house and for which she has to pay the EMI with interest. 4.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are the employees under the second accused / builder and they do not have any overt act in the alleged occurrence; since the petitioners are not in control in the affairs of the project which is being carried out by the second accused, they cannot be implicated for having got any criminal intention in the project.
5.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the first respondent police submitted that the investigation is pending and lot of materials have to be unearthed and only then the real facts behind the scam would come to light.
6.
The learned counsel for the second respondent / de facto complainant submitted that it is a large scale scam committed by the accused nos.1 to 4 in order to cheat the innocent purchasers by giving assurance to give good houses after receiving valuable consideration from them. The 3/6
petitioners along with other accused had cheated the de facto complainant like others and got large sum to be sanctioned by the Bank that is almost 95% for all cases but later cheated the purchasers by not handing over the houses in time and not even continuing the construction. 7.
The occurrence is said to have started from the stage of giving advertisement by the builder. Only if the investigation is allowed to be done, the real facts will come to light. Since the second respondent / de facto complainant has stated about the large scale scam involved in this case and on the assurance of the interest free long term micro credit to the purchasers, I do not think that it is a case which has to be quashed at the threshold stage itself. If at the end of the investigation, if there is no material available against them, the petitioner can take the liberty of filing petition to quash the proceedings on that ground.
8.
With these observations, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
4/6
05.12.2022 Speaking order / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes sri To 1.State by:
The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Team IV, EDF-II, Vepery, Chennai-7.
2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
5/6
R.N.MANJULA , J.
sri 05.12.2022 6/6