HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8089 of 2022
ORDER:
1. This petition is filed to enlarge the petitioner/A1 on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with FIR No.444 of 2022 registered for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC on the file of Jubile Hills Police Station, Hyderabad.
2. Briefly, the allegation against this petitioner/A1 is that the defacto complainant is the absolute owner and possessor of two flats in Jubilee Hills area. The said property was purchased by the company Mark Portfolio Services Private Limited vide registered document No.1898 of 2013 and 1899 of 2013 by paying sale consideration. It is the case that the petitioner and others forged the signatures and created false documents such as sale-cum-GPA and also cash receipts with an intention to grab the property and the persons are trying to dispossess based on the said forged documents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the defacto complainant executed an agreement of sale-cum-GPA 2 on 07.04.2014 and amounts were paid to the defacto complainant and he had delivered vacant possession of the flat. Though the defacto complainant received major amounts, he was not registering the property, for which reason, legal notice dated 04.06.2020 was issued to register the property. However, there was no reply, for which reason, civil suit OS No.141 of 2020 on the file of the XXVI Additional Chief Judge was filed seeking specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 07.04.2014. The petitioner also filed a private complaint in respect of the same property against the defacto complainant with the Jubilee Hills Police Station, but till date no action has been taken against the defacto complainant and one Balvinder Singh.
4. The petitioner was impleaded for the reason of political rivalry. Further, W.P.No.17661 of 2020 was also filed complaining about the harassment of police and interfering in civil disputes. The said writ petition was disposed off ordering police to conduct enquiry by following the procedure. 3
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajeshbhai Muljibhai Patel v. State of Gujarat1 and argued that the evidence of handwriting expert is not conclusive and when the civil court had framed an issue whether the documents were fabricated or not, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that registration of FIR would cause prejudice to the interests of the parties and consequently quashed the FIR.
6. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that this modus operandi was adopted by the petitioner in two other cases also which are pending investigation. The petitioner firstly identifies the properties which are vacant for some time and creates documents claiming ownership on that properties and accordingly files cases both criminal to get hold of the property and in the process, extracts money from the original purchasers. He further submits that agreement of sale in question dated 07.04.2014 was sent to the handwriting expert 1 (2020) 3 Supreme Court Cases 794 4 and the expert gave opinion that the signatures were fabricated.
7. In the back ground of the pending cases in between the parties and also on the basis of allegations made against this petitioner, I deem it appropriate to direct as follows:
i) The petitioner shall submit all his documents to the Investigating Officer and the Investigating Officer shall consider the representation of the ongoing disputes between the parties.
ii) The petitioner shall not be arrested for a period of three weeks from the date of this order and the police can go ahead with the procedure prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure thereafter.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed off.
__________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 28.09.2022 kvs 5 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION No.8089 of 2022 Date: 28.09.2022.
kvs 6