AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioner seeks to quash a criminal prosecution against him. He seeks the relief under Sec.482 of Cr.P.C .
The 2nd respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner and another. It was filed before the judicial magistrate of the first class, North Paravur. A copy of the complaint is annex-A1. It was filed alleging commission of an offence punishable under Sec.420 of IPC . The learned magistrate forwarded the complaint to the local station house officer under Sec.156(3) of Cr.P.C . On receipt of the complaint a case was registered at the North Paravur police station.
Annex-A2 is a copy of the FIR. The petitioner filed Crl.M.C.1342/2013 before this court to get the FIR quashed. The investigating officer, while the said Crl.M.C was pending, filed annex- A3 final report under Sec.173(2) of Cr.P.C .
Crl.M.C.1342/2013 was dismissed by this court in view of the filing of the final report. This court, however, granted permission to the petitioner to challenge the final report on legal grounds. Annex-A4 is the copy of the order of this court. The present Crl.M.C is filed requesting to quash annex-A3 final report.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned public prosecutor and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.
The petitioner contends that the dispute between himself and the 2nd respondent is purely civil in nature. According to the petitioner, a property was purchased by him from its previous owner, but the 2nd respondent with the intention to have an unlawful gratification from the petitioner filed a false complaint against him. It is also contended that the allegations in the complaint, even if true, would only reveal a civil dispute.
The criminal prosecution against the petitioner is liable to the quashed if the allegations in annex-A1 complaint disclose only a dispute of purely civil in nature.
I read annex-A1 complaint carefully. It is a detailed complaint narrating the events which allegedly happened. The crux of the allegations is that a property in which the 2nd respondent had invested money, and which he had contracted to purchase, had to be purchased in the name of the petitioner who had not shelled out money for its purchase. The 2nd respondent narrates in his complaint how the sale deed happened to be executed in favour of the petitioner instead of the former. It is alleged that it was got done exploiting superstition. The 2nd respondent alleges in his complaint that he was made to believe that, he being a christian by religion, purchase of the property in his name would make the supernatural powers anger which would even result in his death. He states further that he was made to believe so by the petitioner and the co-accused. It is also alleged that the petitioner assured to execute sale deed when the 2nd respondent, who was doing real estate business, finds a purchaser for the property.
But, it is alleged, the petitioner changed his colour and refused to execute sale deed in favour of the person who agreed to purchase the property from the 2nd respondent.
The allegations in the complaint may be true or
false. Whether the allegations are true or not is a matter for evidence. This court in a proceedings under Sec.482 of Cr.P.C will not appreciate any form of evidence produced to prove a disputed fact. If the allegations in the complaint are true, it cannot be said that there is no element of cheating attracting Sec.420 of IPC . It is not possible to hold that the allegations in the complaint are only of civil in nature. The petitioner cannot call upon this court in a proceedings under Sec.482 of Cr.P.C to decide a disputed fact. For the above reasons the petitioner is not entitled to the relief claimed by him. The Crl.M.C deserves only a dismissal. It is made clear that this order will not preclude the petitioner from exercising his
right under Sec.239 of Cr.P.C .
The Crl.M.C is dismissed.