Telangana High Court
Kethavath Vashya vs The State Of Telangana on 3 June, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.10085 of 2023
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C') to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.556 of 2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Jadcherla, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447 and 324 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'I.P.C.').
2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2/de facto complainant lodged a complaint before the Police, Midjil Police Station, Mahabubnagar District stating that his father's brothers totally four in number have joint property of agricultural land to an extent of Ac.3.23 guntas, situated at Peddagundla Thanda. There are land disputes between the petitioners and respondent No.2 and the civil case is pending before the Court below at Kalwakurthy. On 26.06.2022, the petitioners trespassed into the subject land and tilling the land. When the father and mother of respondent No.2 questioned as to why they are tilling in their land, the petitioners beat them with hands, assaulted with stones and caused injuries. Basing 2 SKS,J Crl.P.No.10085 of 2023 on the said complaint, the Police registered a case in Crime No.176 of 2022 and the same was numbered as C.C.No.556 of 2022 before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jadcherla.
3. Heard Sri Siripangi Narssimha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri S. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1- State. Though notice served upon respondent No.2, none appeared on his behalf.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and the allegations leveled against them are false and baseless. He further submitted that the alleged incident took place on 25.06.2022, but in the charge sheet, it is mentioned that the date of occurrence of offence is 26.06.2022. He further submitted that the matter is purely civil in nature and there are disputes between the petitioners and respondent No.2. As respondent No.2 was unable to face the trial, he converted the civil case into the criminal case. Learned counsel further submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in catena of judgments held that a criminal complaint should be quashed when the matter is essentially civil in nature and has been given a cloak of criminal offence as the continuation of such proceedings will amount to an abuse of process of law. 3
SKS,J Crl.P.No.10085 of 2023 Therefore, the allegations leveled against the petitioners are vague and prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against them.
5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are serious in nature and further, there are case and counter case, which require trial, therefore, prayed the Court to dismiss the petition.
6. Having regard to the rival submissions made by both the learned counsel and the material available on record, to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, the Court has to see whether the averments in the complaint prima facie shows that it constitute the offence as alleged by the Police.
7. At this stage, it is pertinent to note the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Surendra Kori 1 , wherein in paragraph No.14, it is held as follows:
"The High Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. does not function as a Court of appeal or revision. This Court has, in several judgments, held that the inherent 1 (2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 155 4 SKS,J Crl.P.No.10085 of 2023 jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., though wide, has to be used sparingly, carefully and with caution. The High Court, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., should normally refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the Court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of wide magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material."
8. Reverting back to the facts of the present case, it is to be noted that there are disputes between the petitioners and respondent No.2. The prime contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the offence took place on 26.06.2022, but the medical certificate i.e., requisition for examination of wounded person, issued on 25.06.2022, therefore, the complaint itself is not maintainable. Further, the genuineness of the said document cannot be decided in this petition without examining the witness, who issued the said document. A bare perusal of the record reveals that the mother of respondent No.2 received injuries, as such, it cannot be said that no alleged offence took place at the scene of offence. Further, there are case and counter case between the petitioners and respondent No.2. Therefore, the allegations against the petitioners require trial. As such, at this stage, it cannot be said that 5 SKS,J Crl.P.No.10085 of 2023 the petitioners are no way concerned with the allegations leveled against them and the same will be decided after full-fledged trial only.
9. In view of the above discussion as well as the law laid down in Surendra Kori (Supra), this Court does not find any merit in the criminal petition to quash the proceedings against the petitioners and the same is liable to be dismissed.
10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
___________ K. SUJANA Date: 03.06.2024 SAI