Neethimani @ Mani v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 05.02.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.748 of 2026 & Crl.M.P.No.393 of 2026

1. Neethimani @ Mani

2. R.Praveena ... Petitioners/A1 & A3 Vs.

1. The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, CCB Police Station, Salem City. (Crime No.19 of 2025)

2. Chandrasekaran ... Respondents Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS Act seeking to call for the records relating to the First Information Report in Crime No.19 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the 1st respondent, quash the same by allowing this petition.

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Sathish Kumar For R1 : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor For R2 : Mr.A.P.Pasupathy 1/5

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking to call for the records relating to the First Information Report in Crime No.19 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the 1st respondent and quash the same. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners/accused, who are running a real estate business under the name and style of "Velocity Developers and Blossoms Asset's & Developers", cheated the de facto complainant by failing to execute a sale deed after receiving the total consideration of Rs.28,00,000/- in connection with the sale of a property. 3.Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that a matter of a commercial nature has been falsely projected as a case of cheating. He would also submit that the respondent/de facto complainant, instead of filing a suit for specific performance, filed a false complaint, based on which, the First Information Report was registered for the offences under Sections 120(B), 420 and 506(i) IPC.

4.Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioners induced the de facto complainant to pay a total sum of Rs.28,00,000/-, but failed to execute the sale deed. He would further submit 2/5

that the petitioners are habitual offenders and similar cases are pending against them at Madurai CCB and that they were previously arrested and released on bail and the investigation is at a crucial/nascent stage. 5.Learned counsel appearing for the second respondent/de facto complainant would submit that the second respondent is a Marine Engineer, who believed the advertisement issued by the petitioners promoting their land and based on this belief, the de facto complainant had deposited a sum of Rs.28,00,000/-. However, the petitioners/accused have cheated the de facto complainant and other similar cases are pending against them. 6.In view of the fact that the investigation is at a crucial/nascent stage, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings especially since the petitioners have allegedly cheated three other persons in a similar manner in addition to the de facto complainant.

7.Accordingly, the above Criminal Original petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected criminal miscellaneous petition is closed. 05.02.2026 raa 3/5

To 1.The Inspector of Police, CCB Police Station, Salem City.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

4/5

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA J.

raa Crl.O.P.No.748 of 2026 & Cr.M.P.No.393 of 2026 05.02.2026 5/5