Naroju Narasimha Chary, Warangal ... vs State Of Ap., Rep. Pp., And Anr.,
2021 Latest Caselaw 3124 Tel

    THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA

                 CRLM.P.No.7014 OF 2013
                        IN/AND
           CRIMINAL PETITION No.4271 OF 2013

COMMON ORDER:

     This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.402 of

2012 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of

First Class, Jangaon (for short, trial Court).

     The brief facts of the case are as follows:

     The de facto complainant-second respondent herein

filed a private complaint dated 18.08.2011 before the trial

Court, which was subsequently referred to the Police Station,

Jangaon, for investigation. Thereupon, the Police registered a

case in Crime No.294 of 2011 against the petitioners-accused

under Sections 419 and 420 of IPC. The second respondent

herein is the daughter of one Mr.Macharloju Brahma Chary.

She was acquainted with the second petitioner. Both of them

intended to perform marriage and the same was conveyed to

their parents. The father of the second respondent executed a

registered sale deed vide document No.375 of 2004 dated

26.02.2004 in favour of the second petitioner herein and

delivered possession of the house in the year 2005. Later, the

second respondent came to know that the first petitioner

herein is trying to perform the marriage of the second

petitioner with another girl on 28.05.2011. The petitioners

state that the complaint lodged by the second respondent is

false and only to coerce them to yield to their illegal demands.

The father of the second respondent was severely indebted

and to clear of the dues, he sold the property which was

registered in favour of the second petitioner for a valid

consideration. It is further alleged that after conducting due

investigation, the Police filed a final report on 19.11.2011

stating that it is a false case. Subsequently, the father of the

second respondent also filed a case before the same Police

almost with the same allegations, which was registered as

Crime No.1682 of 2011 and the same was taken on file as

C.C.No.184 of 2012 on the file of the learned II Metropolitan

Magistrate, Cyberabad, for the offences punishable under

Sections 420, 509 and 506 of IPC and that the trial in the

above case had already begun.

The petitioners further allege that during the pendency

of the above C.C., the father of the second respondent had

filed an application under Section 202 Cr.P.C. before the

learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Jangaon, in Crime

No.294 of 2012 by suppressing the pendency of C.C.No.184 of

2012. They state that the allegations in C.C.No.184 of 2012

and C.C.No.402 of 2012 are literally one and the same and

the trial in C.C.No.184 of 2012 is already commenced.

Therefore, the petitioners requested the Court to grant interim

stay of all proceedings in C.C.No.402 of 2012 and also to

quash the same.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

learned Public Prosecutor.

Perused the record.

This Court by its order dated 29.04.2013 granted interim

stay.

Crl.M.P.No.7014 of 2013 was filed to vacate the order dated

29.04.2013 granted in Crl.P.No.4271 of 2013. In the counter-

affidavit filed by the second respondent, it is contended that Crime

No.1682 of 2011 is nothing to do with C.C.No.402 of 2012. In fact,

it was filed when the petitioners threatened her and her family

members and also disturbed the marriage alliances. It was also

represented that the petitioners herein have approached this Court

without any valid grounds and to avoid process of law. It is also

alleged that all the facts mentioned in her complaint would

disclose the commission of the offence by the petitioners, and

therefore requested to vacate the stay granted by this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioners filed a copy of the

judgment dated 27.11.2015 rendered in C.C.No.184 of 2012 in

which A.1 and A.2, the petitioners herein, are found not guilty for

the offences punishable under Sections 420, 509 and 506 of IPC

and accordingly they were acquired. He also relied upon the

judgment dated 24.03.2014 rendered by this Court in

Crl.P.No.8824 of 2013 in which it was held that letdown from a

promise to marry does not in any way attract the offence under

Section 420 of IPC. Learned counsel also relied upon the judgment

dated 21.06.2018 in Crl.P.No.11316 of 2017 for the same

proposition. Therefore, learned counsel would submit that the

second respondent developed love and affection towards the

second petitioner herein and both of them were intending to marry

each other and as such her father also executed a registered sale

deed in his favour and handed over possession of the property.

Per contra, the second respondent would submit that the

property was sold by her father for valid consideration as he was

indebted and to clear the dues.

From the above facts, it can be culled out that the age of the

second respondent was 21 years as on the date of filing of the

complaint and that she was major and this Court held that

letdown from a promise to marry does not in any way attract the

offence under Section 420 IPC. The petitioners are well aware of

the consequences of the acts done by the second respondent

herein. The second respondent also filed another complaint against

the petitioners herein stating that the second petitioner is trying to

disturb the alliances came to her and that the allegations in

C.C.No.184 of 2012 and C.C.No.402 of 2012 are almost similar

except the vague allegation of making phone calls and causing

prejudice to the marriage prospects of the second respondent

herein. Since the proceedings in C.C.No.184 of 2012 were already

ended in acquittal, this Court finds that there is no point in

proceeding with C.C.No.402 of 2012 and is liable to be quashed.

Further more, prima facie, it appears that there is a case and

counter-case, and therefore, the complaint lacks merits and is not

sustainable in the eye of law. Therefore, continuing the

proceedings in C.C.No.402 of 2012 against the petitioners would

amount to abuse of process of law.

For the reasons stated above, the Criminal Petition is

allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.402 of 2012 pending on the

file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jangaon, are

hereby quashed. Interim orders dated 29.04.2013 in Crl.P.No.4271

of 2013 shall stand vacated.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand

closed in the light of this final order.

___________________ P.SREE SUDHA, J 29th OCTOBER, 2021.

pgs