Telangana High Court
Jakka Ram Reddy And 3 Others vs The State Of Telangana And Another on 12 June, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.1620 of 2022
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the petitioners/accused Nos.1, 3, 4 & 6 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in CC.No.572 of 2021 on the file of the XXVI Metropolitan Magistrate, Ibrahimpatnam, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420, 447, 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC').
2. The brief facts of the cases are that the respondent NO.2/de facto complainant lodged a complaint on behalf of Tirumala Housing Private Limited, stating that he has purchased Ac.2.00 guntas of land in Survey Nos.764, 767 of Nandiwanaparthi Village, from one Lawankala Anil Kumar through his AGPA holder Kaza Kalyan Chakravarthy vide sale deed No.7436 of 2006 and the said sale includes undivided share of internal road that includes 40 feet access road in survey No.764 that connects to main road in survey NO.767. However, when 2 SKS,J Crl.P.No.1620 of 2022 the complainant recently visited his land in Nandiwanaparthi Village, he found that the land in survey No.764 has been illegally trespassed and cultivated by one Jakka Reddy/petitioner No.1/accused No.1 and others. It is stated that the said Kaza Kalyan Chakravarthy cheated the respondent NO.2 and has again sold his share of land in survey Nos.767 and 764 to petitioner Nos.2 to 4/accused Nos.3, 4 and 6.
3. On receipt of the said complaint, the Police investigated the matter and on completion of due investigation, they filed charge sheet against the petitioners who are arrayed as accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 6, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 447, 427 read with Section 34 of IPC. Aggrieved thereby, this criminal petition is filed.
4. Heard Sri KS.Suneel, learned counsel for petitioners/accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 6, Sri S.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent No.1 - State and Sri Goverdhan Venu, learned counsel for respondent NO.2/de facto complainant. 3
SKS,J Crl.P.No.1620 of 2022
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent No.2 has filed false complaint against the petitioners alleging that he has purchased Acs.2.00 guntas of land in survey Nos.767, 764 of Nandiwanaparthi Village vide registered document bearing No.7436 of 2006 from one Lawankala Anil Kumar through his AGPA holder Kaza Kalyan Chakravarthy/accused No.2 but factually he has purchased land only in survey No.767. He contended that for the said sale agreement, the total sale consideration was decided to be Rs.58,00,000/-., out of which the receipt of Rs.11,70,000/- was duly acknowledged towards advance and earnest money as well. He asserted that the petitioners have filed a suit for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 11.10.2018 vide OS.No.83 of 2021 on the file of the XIV Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, against the respondent NO.2 and the same is pending. He lamented that the respondent No.2 has filed false complaint against the petitioners by suppressing the fact about execution of the agreement of sale. He contended that the allegation leveled against the petitioners with regard to alleged illegal trespass and illegal cultivation is baseless. Therefore, prayed this Court to allow the 4 SKS,J Crl.P.No.1620 of 2022 Criminal Petition by quashing the proceedings against the petitioners.
6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent NO.1, and the learned counsel appearing for respondent NO.2, respectively, submitted that the dispute pertains to civil nature and the allegations leveled against the petitioners being serious, the matter requires full-fledged trial. Therefore, prayed this Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.
7. Having regard to the rival submissions made and on going through the material placed on record, along with the statements of the witnesses, it is noted that the dispute between the parties is with regard to the sale of property and its registration. In this regard, the petitioners have already filed O.S.No.83 of 2021 against the respondent No.2.
8. At this stage, it is pertinent to note the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of Madhya 5 SKS,J Crl.P.No.1620 of 2022 Pradesh vs. Surendra Kori 1, paragraph No.14 reads as under:
"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 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."
9. Perusal of the averments made in the complaint and the charge sheet would reveal that the respondent NO.2 has allegedly purchased Ac.2.00 guntas of land in Survey Nos.764, 767 of Nandiwanaparthi Village, from one Lawankala Anil Kumar through his AGPA holder Kaza 1 (2012) 10 SCC 155 6 SKS,J Crl.P.No.1620 of 2022 Kalyan Chakravarthy vide sale deed No.7436 of 2006 but later he came to know that the said AGPA has sold his share of land in survey Nos.767 and 764 to petitioner Nos.2 to 4/accused Nos.3, 4 and 6 and when he visited his land, he noticed that the petitioner No.1/accused No.1 has illegally trespassed and cultivated the land in survey No.764.
10. In other words, the primary dispute between the parties is with regard to the sale and registration of subject property. That being so, this Court is of the opinion that the matter requires full-fledged trial and there are no merits in this criminal petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. However, keeping in view the fact that there are no specific set of serious allegations against the petitioner Nos.2 to 4/accused Nos.3, 4 and 6, this Court is of the considered view to quash the proceedings initiated against them.
11. In view of the above discussion, this Criminal Petition is partly allowed and the proceedings initiated against the petitioner NOs.2 to 4/accused Nos.3, 4 and 6 in CC.No.572 of 2021 on the file of the XXVI Metropolitan 7 SKS,J Crl.P.No.1620 of 2022 Magistrate, Ibrahimpatnam, are hereby quashed, while permitting the prosecution to proceed further against the petitioner N0.1/accused No.1, in accordance with law.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date:12.06.2024 PT