Susila v. The State Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29-08-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR and Crl.M.P.No.16338 of 2025 Susila W/o. Devendra, Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The State Inspector of Police Tambaram CCB, Tambaram City, Chengalpattu.

2.Dhandapani S/o. Loganathan, Respondent(s) PRAYER This Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records in Crime No.18 of 2025, dated 04.07.2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Tambaram-CCB, Tambaram City, Chengalpattu, and quash the Impugned FIR as against the Petitioner. For Petitioner(s):

Mr. B.A. Sujay Prasanna

For Respondent(s):

Mr. R.Vinothraja, Govt. Advocate (crl.side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.18 of 2025 for the offences under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 61(2) of BNS as against the petitioner.

2. The petitioner is arrayed as A3. The crux of the case is that on inducement of the accused persons, the defacto complainant/2 nd respondent had executed a power of attorney in favour of the 4 th accused for development of his 7.67 acres of land at Thaiyur Village, for a total sale consideration of Rs.36,04,90,000/-. It is alleged that the accused proceeded to sell 162 plots, realizing several Crores in consideration, but failed to remit the due to the 2 nd respondent/defacto complainant. It is further alleged that the accused threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences, trespassed into his farmhouse and removed valuable securities.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there are no specific averments indicating the petitioner's role in the alleged transactions and prays to quash the FIR as against the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent opposed the petition, stating that the power of attorney was executed by the defacto complainant only on the deceitful inducement of the accused. Further the life certificate and the signature of the defacto complainant have been forged .

5. I have considered the matter in the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides and perused the materials available on records carefully.

6. The investigation has also revealed that the life certificate and the signature of the defacto complainant have been forged. In view of the above

and on considering the overall allegations contained in the FIR, this Court is not inclined to quash FIR at this stage.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. However, Investigating Officer has ensured that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner/A3.

29-08-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes mrp To The State Inspector of Police Tambaram CCB, Tambaram City, Chengalpattu.

N.SATHISH KUMAR J.

mrp 29-08-2025