Vinoth Anand, (Male/33 Years) v. The State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 05.10.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN Crl.OP.No.2787/2017 [Video Conferencing] 1.Vinoth Anand 2.K.Vinoth Kumar

...Petitioners/Accused 2-3

Versus

1. The State by, Inspector of Police, B-13, Pothanur Police Station, Coimbatore.

(Crm No.708/2015) ...1st Respondent/Complainant

2. Mohammed Sabi ...2nd Respondents/Defacto complainant Prayer : - Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records of the case pending trial in Crime No.708/2015 on the file of the B-13, Pothanur Police Station, Coimbatore and quash the same.

For Petitioners :

Mr.J.Kingsly Solomon For R1 :

Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(1) The present petition has been filed seeking to quash the further investigation in Crime No.708/2015 registered by the 1st respondent/Inspector of Police, B-13, Pothanur Police Station at Coimbatore.

(2) The said FIR had been registered under Sections 406, 420 and 506(ii) of IPC pursuant to a direction issued by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Crl.OP.No.29597/2015 dated 15.12.2015.

(3) It is the case of the 2nd respondent that he had approached the present petitioner through another individual, to

mobilize funds for the Real Estate business of the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant. In that regard, he handed over a Benz Car and a BMW car along with the RC Book stating that the loan amount would be transferred through RTGS.

(4) The loan amount was not transferred. Therefore, the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant lodged the police complaint on 01.12.2015.

(5) It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the entire facts in the FIR are all false particularly because one of the vehicles belongs to the petitioner herein. It is also stated that learned Magistrate had also directed return of the vehicle to the petitioner herein.

(6) A Status Report has been filed by the 1st respondent stating that the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant is not available to give further information to the 1st respondent police to proceed further with the investigation.

(7) It is seen that the FIR is pending from the year 2015. (8) A direction is given that investigation should be completed on or before 15.11.2021 and if before that time, the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant does not present himself to give necessary instructions to the 1st respondent police, the 1st respondent police may take appropriate decision keeping in mind the long pendency of the FIR and file such a report before the concerned Judicial Magistrate who may also take such a report on record.

(9) With the said observations, the Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) /True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar CDA

To

1. The Inspector of Police, B-13, Pothanur Police Station, Coimbatore.

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

Crl.OP.No.2787/2017 BR[co] NSK 26/10/2021