Telangana High Court
G.Venkataiah vs The State Of Telangana, on 12 June, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.6514 OF 2023
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.3 in C.C.No.94 of 2023 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, at Tandur, Vikarabad District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 408 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC').
2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent NO.2/de facto complainant who is the Chairman of the Primary Agricultural Credit Societies (for short 'PACS'), Basheerabad Mandal, lodged a complaint stating that a program was organized by the PACS, Basheerabad Mandal, to buy chickpeas in which several farmers came forward to sell their chickpeas but it was found that the petitioner/accused NO.3 along with accused Nos.1 and 2 hatched a plan to gain easy money by selling the chickpeas to other people by falsifying the weight and cheating the farmers.
2
SKS,J Crl.P.No.6514 OF 2023
3. On receipt of said complaint, the Police investigated the matter and on completion of due investigation a charge sheet was filed against the petitioner whereunder the petitioner was arrayed as accused NO.2. Aggrieved thereby, this Criminal Petition is filed.
4. Heard Sri C.Sharan Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner/accused No.3, Sri S.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent No.1 - State, and Sri Rajgopalan Tayi, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
5. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that neither the charge sheet, nor the complaint averments disclose that the petitioner has purchased chickpeas from the farmers and sold the same in the market and obtained profits from the same. He contended that except alleging that the petitioner had intentions to obtain wrongful gains by selling chickpeas in the market, there is no material filed to prove the same. He asserted that the prime ingredients that cater to a criminal offence are categorized in four parts viz., intention, preparation, attempt and commission. In addition, he lamented that the averments of charge sheet and complaint would only attract the intention and 3 SKS,J Crl.P.No.6514 OF 2023 at the most preparation ingredients. He reiterated that no offence as alleged against the petitioner attracts in the present case, as such, prayed this Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.
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 initially the Police apprehended accused Nos.1 and 2 who confessed their guilt and thereafter, the Police, on receipt of credible information, apprehended the petitioner/accused No.3 and enquiry, he has also admitted his guilt. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor asserted that in support of the allegations levelled against the petitioner/accused No.3, the statements of the witnesses are filed which would clearly prove his guilt. Therefore, prayed the Court to dismiss the petition.
7. Having regard to the rival submissions made and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that during the course of the investigation the identities of the petitioner/accused No.3, along with accused Nos.1 and 2 were well established and that they were working as employees in 4 SKS,J Crl.P.No.6514 OF 2023 Nawandgi PACS, at Basheerabad Mandal, who hatched a plan to gain easy money by selling the chickpeas of the farmers to the other people by falsifying the weight of the chickpeas. The averments of the charge sheet would reveal that when LW-12 received credible information, the accused Nos.1 and 2 were apprehended and their statement was recorded wherein, they admitted commission of offence. Further, accused Nos.1 and 2 stated that on instructions of accused No.3 they have falsely weighted chickpeas.
8. In addition, it is needless to mention that 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 against the accused persons, as alleged by the Police. That being so, it is imperative 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 jurisdiction 1 (2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 155 5 SKS,J Crl.P.No.6514 OF 2023 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. In the present case, it is noted that though learned counsel for petitioner/accused NO.3 contends that the case is based on vague allegations, and it is only at the stage of preparation only, it is pertinent to note that the statement of witnesses would show that the offence is committed by accused Nos.1 and 2, on instructions of petitioner/accused No.3. Further, the inspection report of Nawandgi PACS dated 31.08.2023 reveals that on their verification, they noticed irregularities in weighting chickpeas. Therefore, it cannot be said that no offence took place. Further, closing of enquiry against the petitioner cannot be a ground for quashing the criminal proceedings.
6
SKS,J Crl.P.No.6514 OF 2023
10. In view of the above discussion and having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh (supra), this Court is of the opinion that the matter requires full-fledged trial and there are no merits in the criminal petition to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.3 and the same is liable to be dismissed.
11. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 12.06.2024 PT