Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.04.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL CRL. OP(MD). No.2877 of 2025 and Crl.M.P(MD)No.1919 of 2025 1. Thangapandi 2. Poomari ... Petitioners Vs. 1. The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch Madurai District 2. Balamurugan ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call for the records relating to the First Information Report in Crime No. 14 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same against the petitioners. For Petitionera : Mr.R.Selvaraj For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar No.1 Government Advocate (Crl. Side) No.2 : Mr.P.Naveen Kumar _____________ Page No. 1 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2025 O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.14 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent police. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the second respondent lodged a false complaint against these petitioners along with one Palpandi/A1 alleging that he was employed in AKP real estate and used to collect money from the public and pay interest for the amount received by him. While so the second respondent based on the representation of the first accused deposited a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- on 15.02.2022. Thereafter on 09.06.2022 he invested Rs.3,00,000/- and also invested Rs.2,00,000/- on 04.07.2022. Thereafter the first accused paid interest for some time and thereafter failed to return the same. For security the said Palpandi had executed bond on 04.07.2022 and he also paid a sum of Rs.5,52,000/-as profit. Thereafter the second respondent came to know that the said Palpandi had cheated defacto complainant along with others, these petitioners are the family members of Palpandi and when he visited the house of Palpandi and asked about _____________ Page No. 2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2025 the amount the family members including these petitioners threatened with dire consequences, thereby the defacto complainant lodged a complaint . Infact these petitioners are no way connected with the transactions between A1 Palpandi and the second respondent. The alleged occurrence took place from 01.12.2021 to 31.12.2013 but the complaint was lodged only on 02.08.2024. There are no averments to constitute the offence under Sections 406,420,294(b), 506(1) r/w.120(B) of IPC against these petitioners. The First Information Report has been registered only after delay of three years. A1 after his marriage being the eldest son of the family left the family and residing separately with his wife. The petitioners are no way connected with AKP real estates. Therefore the registration of the First Information Report against these petitioners without any materials is abuse of process of law and therefore the pending First Information Report is liable to be quashed. 3. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the first respondent would submit that based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant/second respondent the first respondent registered a case in Crime No.14 of 2024 for the offences under Sections 406,420,294(b), 506(1) r/w.120(B) of IPC and the case is under _____________ Page No. 3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2025 investigation and at this stage the First Information Report cannot be quashed and hence petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent would submit that the first accused who is the family member of the petitioner was running AKP real estates wherein the defacto complainant has invested huge money of Rs.12,00,000/-. Thereafter the first accused shared income of Rs. 5,52,000/- and thereafter he neither shared income nor repaid the money. Therefore he approached the first accused and he executed a bond for the said amount. Thereafter the first accused involved in a criminal case and remanded to judicial custody. Whileso, the second respondent approached the family members of the petitioners, at that time they used obscene words and also threatened with dire consequences. Therefore he lodged a complaint and based on the same, the First Information Report has been registered and the case is under investigation and at this stage the matter required elaborate investigation, therefore the petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. _____________ Page No. 4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2025 6. As per the case of prosecution the first accused cheated the defacto complainant by receiving money and thereafter not repaid the same. Thereafter the defacto complainant approached the family members of the first accused at that time these petitioners used obscene words and threatened with dire consequences. Therefore the second respondent lodged a complaint and based on the same a case has been registered and it is under investigation. According to the petitioners no offence was committed by them and even as per the First Information Report no any averments to constitute the offence and the allegations are only bald, vague and general allegations as against these petitioners. 7. This Court carefully perused all the materials. In the complaint there are allegations as against the first accused in respect of money invested in the real estate business. The allegations as against these petitioners are that when the defacto complainant went to the house of the petitioners they along with others threatened the defacto complainant not to come to house otherwise they will kill him. Therefore he lodged complaint . Apart from that there are no any allegations as against these petitioners and there is no specific allegations as against the family members. Therefore without any specific allegations and based on bald, _____________ Page No. 5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2025 vague and general allegations the petitioners cannot face the criminal case and the main allegations are as against A1. Further even as per the First Information Report there are no any materials available to constitute the offence as against these petitioners. The words employed in the First Information Report are as follows “ mq;fpUe;j ghy;ghz;baplk; gzk; Nfl;gjw;fhf mtuJ tPl;bw;F khiy Rkhh; 6 kzpf;F nrd;Nwd;. mq;fpUe;j ghy;ghz;bapd; FLk;gj;jhu;fshfpa Nkw;gb fhspKj;J> cf;fpughz;b> jq;fg;ghz;b> G+khhp MfpNahh;fs; vd;dplk; Kiwahf gjpy; nrhy;yhky; ghy;ghz;b vq;fpUf;fpwhh; vd;W vq;fSf;F njhpahJ vq;f tPl;bw;F te;J gzk; Nfl;lhy; eP capNuhl Nghf KbahJ cd; gzj;ij ,dpNky; Nfl;L tuhj vd;W nrhy;yp mrpq;fkhf rj;jk; Nghl;L vd;id nfhiy kpul;ly; tpLj;J tpul;bdhh;fs;”. Therefore there is no specific allegations against each accused and only the vague and general allegations levelled in the First Information Report. The above words will not constitute the offence, therefore the pending First Information Report is liable to be quashed as against these petitioners. _____________ Page No. 6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2025 8 Accordingly the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the First Information Report in Crime No.14 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent police is hereby quashed as against these petitioners. . Consequently connected miscellaneous petition stands closed. 17.04.2025 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No aav To 1. The Inspector of Police District Crime Branch Madurai District 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. _____________ Page No. 7 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD) No.2877 of 2025 P.DHANABAL , J. aav Crl.O.P(MD)No.2877 of 2025 17.04.2025 _____________ Page No. 8 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis