Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Mudavath Kasi Nayak vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 3 January, 2024
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR .
'PRESENT: 4
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RP
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9963 OF 2023
noe
Sehveen:
1. Mudavath Kasi Nayak, S/o. Sormala Nayak, Aged. 88 years, Gee: mx. Arey
and Cullvation, UHNo. T-12/200/4, Ganesh Nagar, Giddatur Tawn anc
Mandal, Prakasam District,
N
Naser Srinivasuly, Sic, Venkataiah, Aged: 38 years, Occ: Gallivation
Rig. O.No.5-42-188.420/4 | Near Srinivasa Theater, Giddslur Town and
Mandal, Prakasam {Netrict.
Oe
"Mucdarla Srinivasulu, Slo Venkatalah, Aged 50 years, Oon. Cultivation
Rio. DLNe. 1-2-43/1, Srifan Road, Giddalur Town & Mandal, Prakasam Distict.
... Pativieners/Accused No.i to 3
. AND
The State OF Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by i's Puble Prosecutor, High Caurt af AP at
Nelapada,
.. RespondentiCamplainant
Petition under Section 438 of Cr PLO. praying that in the circumstanoas stated
In the affidavit Mad in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be
Messed to Enlarge an bail fo the pettioners/Accused Nod to 3 in the event of their
arrest by the police in Crime No.428 of 2023 dated 34-10-2023 of SHO, Ghidalur
<
registered under section 420. AG? 488, 474 rw Ba [PO
Ths petdion conmung on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the
affiidavil fled in support thereof and upon hearing the argumenis of Mis NAGARAJL
NAGURU Advocate for the Petitionars, ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent and the Court made the following.
THE HON'RLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIMARIUNA RAG
Criminal Petition No. SO83 of 2033
ORDER:
SSeS
i. This Criminal Petition is fied by Pet rsfAccused Nos.i fo 3 under
Section 438 of the Cace of Criminal Procedure, 1979 (for short, (Or.P.0}
seeking antitinatory ball in Cr.No.428 of 2023 of Giddalur Polfee Station,
Prakasam District, reqisherer
467, 468, APT riw 34 af IPC
3. The brief facts of the Prosecutian's case are that the Defacto
Complainant's mother was granted @ house site patha for an extent of
Acd.O07 cents in 1OS2, leter i was confirmed in 1985 after paying the
market value of groperty to the Government of Rs. 840y-, Fram i985
arwards, i was urvier their peacehl possession and enloyrnent during the
ffetirne of Nis parents snd Abn. But in June-July 2023, the said house sits
was grabbed by A.2 by way of laying the founcetion and erecting walls, Aut
fraudulently obtained an old blank patta document, created a fake patie,
coflected ante-lated stemp papers and scribed a fake unregistered sale
gereament in Favour of him which was purported to be signed by his mother
i.Koteswaramuma in 1982. He could produce the genuine slanature of his
mather which does not match with ihe signature and the same was forced
by A.i in the unregistered sale agreement. All to AS altmoether created
Meet Sige
t3
fraudulent, fake and unregistered agreement of sale in favour of AZ and A2
for 3 Ve cents each in the said house sibs,
3. The brief facts of the Petitioners' case are that they are innocent and
has been falsely implicated due to prices escalation on the land: the Defarta
Complainant with a malafide intention foisted the above case aqainst them is
an afterthought his appearance in O.S.No.358 of 2023 on the Me of Principal
Junier Clv§ Judge, Giddalur, fled by 1S Petitioner and obtelned ad-interim
injunction against him; Defacto Complainant and his farnily rsembers never
been in possession and emicoyment of the above house plot: they are
permanent resi ident of Giddatur town, having fixed above and landed
property and there is no question of absconding; they are willing to furnish
sulfable security and abide by any condition which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit to inpose.
4, Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the Respondent
State, opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the investigation is not
commeted.,
5. Heard both sides anc perused the material available on record,
&. AS seen from the Petitioners' contentions, the 1° Petitioner obtained
-
an agreement of sale frorn the Defacto Complainant's mother and fled the
Sieied
suit in O.5.No,358 af 2022 on the file of Junior CM! Judge, Giddal alur, against
the Defacto Complainant herein. In the saiefs uli, the Defacto Compisinant
engaged the counsel and Sri S VNB, Agv ocabhe fled vakalath on behalf of the
O35 7 yo % itt % , "Spe, St wnpes, Lane Gb Ss 3 te rae ag [93 we red
ay @ ad a wy econ ye 'ite we Bb, ay " me Ee SS iba oo a a
Abn ATK Ch. ated oan me ohne ie iid re oo 5 oa as oe hod aan $05 of "we
tc boone a 35 Pee wae "4 % 3 sony pees ne i Fool 8 a3
% o : er Cr "ere foo re vo oe ce &
ge = "we b 6 : a 2 oe a Fee a & $5
EE i ke # e oo be ad oe Ee A oe ; 6 A ny
Bw ; me £6 & 1 & $s "Bg me ge
6% i "<f oe 'aes ia we & " ny ~ "$5 od ae ot 4 "s
eeges me rs bem ae wey oh. re hod ' 3 oA +e Bs wwe) ha oi ae a
83 3 ue esd Ld & a fe Ke oe 5 a doce oon [an Ph ht naa
ibe io eS on : ae £5 yn a3 os res oy ood Sy Sede a bes 6 xe
$2 Soy <, io proses ees ae eos. hows vn ieee fe reed A, ie bee4
oa if hm i nr iced eo Ire en 4 ; me
- gc me a a Th ay ah ie ws 4 uA rn + a £3
ise, fee eed ts Saaet £5 Ke panel oS Ait ted " po ~ B SE ys
x ty Pen, +3 ua heed oa xd oe x, ia And poe "eS
dood . he sad "Ke Se a oe tis TA. ye oe a8 va oe
; $0 " & ™ AS Ys te ee st i (ae oe 63
"ions " _ ys Earoed : ; ea, ne
1s; aN as oF ee on "3 v "CS cr rot 2 ora ke son
ta $B acc: on rs a a ne
uae "oe! Senn ; , " :
oj nc ee a ny oe 7 a sn ©: %
BE t3 ag & & i pt o as Pe " yp fae
meee a Were rae tla " wees on" Sood
Ban : a id Fo dent : 608 2 is 4 ty bee ef
go TN ts ty ti ah, * a £ mB OD
we Fae itt ' z hig! hb om syees roy $3 & sere
ned aa it ot thee' ' CFs c ne ween
: % Wy eg: o a0 A Se wi
3 eed ae ed Z 4% Fa my 7 bene ia * "oe
= oe vee an 4 "gon am Le he hes £4 hh Dood ven
ioe ved - he bee a f es o3 Soh, et ated en, +5 )
"ree Pe Sed eet is) gon we ao oe rs . Ww cad
bes gen 3 ben us "se dt , oe "a Fo bey ay
Gi ts © 2 aa. cs ne yn @ GG ~~" &
Ae as , Fae ¢ dead, ae we oy eet a oe Gs Soe, nies,
ees get ifs oo vsooe ey bon Sine pon Bon pa ay ae aed
"E is e on "5 ee 1 4 peo 8) ge Aeod Hs
. 9, pan * ee Aa We feet bok " deve Sher A seers te
Faay ba A Set, es bl npr, we 16% ES ty at xo eed he
; 5 -s rs) ee 4% oe ies % oo Se a o
te 3 oe a SS on bad a ie ae oer y Hod gt
is a a & a ie cS Py z Le we as
ra A , dod ad Sede re ieee an G ee 3 ea iy
oe i Ry wy PO a a rn ;
A "bee ; test . ™ Aa tft bee ~ few 3 4 eG
te the : w 2 ws @ % * ret ge 6 ot 'st
mG ice tee ih e om o % Ee ye 2S
' ee ay a3 % <. z a Y ms Ce £% eet a
oes ca he 8 se AY feos y " Sin oe By Cr
a " a2 ind ; : Fans eK Met £4 a Fas
¢ , a3 rs ve nas ; be ae Rod heh "t dod £75 A
faa) sy he i LP pe shed 3 oe Pa vn cee! Rt 7 fA rs
& tH we NO a? ge
nS : 5 OU we a ee % ~ O
"~ we us "dere ed ~ a3 oe wee ae) wee a & ». s 4 aS
od best ee fee o . fe th See oe £ os te ae & He a
x on Ke 3 i ees 5 oy ra & a Cs ss 4 ee
eh eG : x my Be € SB ot a Ea ay ; a ae ag a3 den
4 , ( a oe "ood, . cd be
& cS a © ie c up my & % Ss wie od 7 nis me
pe OG a "4 AS) oat a oe Seer Cy oe a ws epee Hi 4 % a 'ks
nang nit a Wood ie bo Soe, ae Oy as Soe So. Sone 2 fe pe Gf a . A . oS
i, fn a rh cal ccd rs : me , ger £ As Be £4 C3 ie. Spee
on ache Sion a re8) St His pe ond iS oe os we 'ned bod onede C fp
BE fF fm a as a rc" en ce
oy pane vy ~ 7 , " thet 4
fA % ae © sa ye OB a ee ta a
Cd eB 2 £ # & 8 ££ so, eee BB eS
ger im ES ¥ a nent g oa "a
o> nee fe, 2 S&S % rey ns one.) ; GB , &
Ne 3 a + fone ae wee, 593 4 tore Bi wt ar a3 3 Bed 3 wee
tet Be Tae {fs @ me ley fi 3 a ad [ag os i ra toy wy ioe
ra Sad ae aa en a o% ; a aod & 4 vow re ope fone 4 3 as wy
& §& 2 Se £2 ww # & BS 8S 4 & S wo VM & & £
a4 bees rss 3, oo £ po i ber i. ees : ear oo id AY ots me,
fg as ea on a : sl ape oe te » ae bee. : a3 bee Ke vbr Fa" "ey
cn > ne wm OUMNH
was executed by the Defacta Campiainant's mother or not, the Defacto
Complainant apprnached the police. At Hs stage, R is not possible to give a
finding by the Investigating Officer about the genuineness of the agreement
and itis to be decidexd by the Civil Court in O.8.No0.358 af 2083,
$. In the aforesaid circumstances, tug Court views that the issue
imvolved i§ of a civ natures and the Petifiener/A.1 approached the
jurisdictional Civi Court by instituting a civ sult and if is pening. The
Pettioner cantends that i was an attempt on the to the Defacto
Commainant to use the criminal procesdinigs as a weapon of harassment
against ths Petitioners. When the matter is pending before the competent
Civil Court, the contentions raised by bath sides, cannot be decided, at this
stage, by this Court or by the Police during investigation. Petitioner/A.1
already approached the Civ¥ Court. Both parties are supposed to work out
their remedies in the Civid Court, if ultimately, the Civil Court comes to the
condusion that the agreement is forged and fabricated as cantenried by the
Defacts Complainant, he may work out his remedies in accordance with the
law, concerning the observations made by the Civi Court in the Judgment.
However, without making any observations cancerning the merits of the
case, this Court is inclined tm grant anticipatnury bell to the Petitioners under
the Following cormitions:
(@]) Peliteners/Ad to AS are directed to surrender before the
Station House Officer, Giddalur Police Station, within two (2)
weeks from today and om such surrender, the Petitioners/A.1
St
to A.3 shall be ndleased on ball on furnishing @ personal bond
mK
for Rs.36,000/- (Rupeas Twenty Thousane ony'
Sa
bey, 4 wg teg OSE F gyn Keadic
sureties for a Hke sum each to fhe satisisction of ine Station
House Officer, Glidalur Police Station.
£53 Se yg re . Rabe rare Sere my $ By
(])On such release, Belltioners shall appear before fhe
cancemed Investigating officer once In @ week Le., on every
Sunday between iG.QG AM to 12.00 Noon for a period of
three (3) rranths.
fanBetitioners shall coonerate with the investi ation and they
% é LATS AIS Me " Y
shall make themselves available for interrogation oy a nolice
at REE 8 i
officer as and when required, and they shall nat, directly or
?
indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any
person acquainted with the facts of the case so as a8)
dissuade them fram disclosing such facts ta the Court or to
any pclice officer.
if. The Criminal Petition is affewwel accordingly.
AS a8 sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, shall stand
closed,
Se SRINIVASA PRASAD
ASS SISTANT. REG HSTRAR...
TRUE COPY!
Ta,
The Principle Junior Civ Judge, Giidalur se}
2A ee\ LREPE EY
The SHG, Giddatur Police Station, pi rakasan 1 Retiet. 7
: IU Advonate [OPUG
i
"one CC to SRI NAGARAJU NAGURY 4 coats
Fwo COs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR , High Gour
. One spare copy
605 Beta} ~ oo
ker
, me
HIGH COURT
TRIRS
ONOU2024
x
>
DATED
SAL. ORDER
o
ths
ee
ae
a
"f
