Manojkumar v. The State Of Tamilnadu, Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 20.08.2025 CORAM :
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13852 of 2025 and Crl.MP(MD) No.11083 of 2025 Manojkumar ... Petitioner Vs 1.The State of Tamilnadu, Rep., By the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai District.
(Crime No.25 of 2025).
2.V.P.K.Baskar
...Respondents
Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records pertaining to Crime No.25 of 2025 dated 31.07.2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, DCB, Madurai District and quash the same insofar as this petitioner is concerned.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed For R1 : Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad Government Advocate (Crl.side) 1/5
O R D E R
The petitioner/A3 in Crime No. 25 of 2025 has filed this petition, seeking quashment of the above proceedings. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant has entered into a contract deed with the accused persons for purchase of a property in S.No.57/1, 58/7, 58/8, to an extent of 82 cents at Kochadai, Madurai. However, they have failed to execute the same. Hence the case. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is an innocent and he has acted as a power agent of one Muthukrishnan. He was not aware of the dispute, if any with Muthukrishnan. A1 and A2 approached the defacto complainant for selling the property belonging to Muthukrishnan and since the petitioner is having a power deed, a document was also executed by the petitioner in favour of the defacto complainant.
However, the document has not been released by the Sub Registrar as the Sub Registrar is having a doubt with regard to the right of Muthukrishnan. In this dispute, this petitioner has also been added as an accused.
and he is not the owner of the property. Moreover, he is not aware that the said Muthukrishnan is having a title over the property or not. 4.Mr.Kottaichamy, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), who takes notice for the first respondent strongly objects for quashing the proceedings in Crime No.25 of 2025 that the grounds raised by this petitioner are matter for trial.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent.
6.Though the petitioner has raised several grounds, this Court is of the opinion that it can be appreciated only during the trial. The investigation agency shall find out the truth, by considering the submissions made by this petitioner during the course of investigation. Whether this petitioner is having any role in the commission of offence and whether he is a scapegoat can be identified only during the investigation. Merely because he has acted as a power agent, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings at the initial stage of investigation. 3/5
The respondent police shall consider the grounds raised by the petitioner in this petition and also consider the representation of this petitioner, dated 15.07.2025, during the course of investigation and file the final report. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the final report, in the manner known to law.
7.With such liberty, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 20.08.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes vrn To The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Madurai District.
4/5
B.PUGALENDHI,J vrn Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13852 of 2025 and Crl.MP(MD) No.11083 of 2025 20.08.2025 5/5