Burla Uttej vs The State Of Telangana
2022 Latest Caselaw 107 Tel

              HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

              CRIMINAL PETITION No.5543 OF 2021

ORDER:

The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section - 482 of

Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.964 of 2021 on the file of

XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal, Cyberabad.

2. The petitioner herein is arraigned as accused No.7 in the above

said C.C. The offences alleged against him are under Sections - 468,

471, 420 and 188 read with 34 of IPC.

3. Heard Mr. Eranki Phanikumar, learned counsel for the

petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of

respondent No.1 - State.

4. The allegations levelled against the petitioner herein as per the

contents of the charge sheet are as under:

i) Accused No.1 has joined in Indian Army in the year 1987 and

was retired from the service in 2013.

ii) Thereafter, he started a business under the name and style 'A1

Geethanjali Defence Academy' at Plot H66, Marwadi Lane, Balaji

Nagar, Jawaharnagar, Kapra to impart coaching to Students through his

wife, Smt. Uma Maheshwari, accused No.6 and his son, Burla Uttej,

petitioner herein - accused No.7.

iii) Accused No.1 having noticed that most of the students were

not having qualified educational certificates and thereby he was losing

business, he hatched a plan in collusion with accused Nos.2 to 5 to make

KL,J Crl.P. No.5543 of 2021

money and accordingly started issuing fake educational certificates to the

needy candidates.

iv) Pursuant to the said illegal plan, accused No.1 started issuing

fake educational certificates to the needy candidates by starting a scheme

of one sitting exam for any degree and any university of their choice, for

which accused No.1 has been charging various fees for different

qualifications, viz., Rs.45,000/- for 10th Class Certificate; Rs.55,000/- for

Intermediate Certificate; Rs.75,000/- for Degree Certificate; Rs.50,000/-

for M.Sc., Certificate; Rs.1,50,000/- for M.Phil., Certificate and

Rs.2,00,000/- for Law Degree Certificate.

v) Thus, accused has collected huge amount from needy

candidates by inducing them that he would provide genuine educational

certificates from reputed Universities under one sitting scheme, with

forged signatures showing them as genuine certificates and thereby

cheated innocent and gullible candidates. Hence, the charge sheet.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the

contents of the charge sheet lack the ingredients of the offences alleged

against the petitioner herein. He would further submit that no

incriminating material was seized from the possession of the petitioner.

The petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged against him.

Therefore, he sought to quash the proceedings against the petitioner

herein.

KL,J Crl.P. No.5543 of 2021

6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor

would contend that there are specific allegations against the accused

including the petitioner herein as he is none other than the son of accused

No.1 and that he is also running affairs of the Institute. He would further

contend that if at all the petitioner is innocent of the offences alleged, he

has to prove the same during trial, but not at this stage. He would further

contend that there are triable issues to be adjudicated during the trial and,

therefore, he sought to dismiss the petition.

7. In view of the above rival submissions, perusal of charge sheet

would reveal that, prima facie, the allegations are against accused No.1.

Accused No.1 is none other than the father of the petitioner herein. It is

alleged in the charge sheet that Accused No.1 is imparting coaching to

the students through his wife, accused No.6 and his son, the petitioner

herein. It is also alleged that Accused No.1 in collusion with accused

Nos.2 to 5, hatched a plan to issue fake educational certificates to the

needy students and lured them to join in his Institute and accordingly

they have issued fake educational certificates to various students by

collecting the amounts. Thus, prima facie, there are allegations against

the petitioner herein - accused No.7, son of accused Nos.1 and 7, and he

is also responsible for the affairs of the Institution. The role played by

the petitioner herein is also specifically mentioned. Thus, there are

several triable issues in the present proceedings.

KL,J Crl.P. No.5543 of 2021

8. The Apex Court in Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar v. The State of

Maharashtra1 has categorically held that quashing criminal proceedings

was called for only in a case where complaint did not disclose any

offence, or was frivolous, vexatious, or oppressive. If allegations set out

in complaint did not constitute offence of which cognizance had been

taken by Magistrate, it was open to the High Court to quash the same. It

was not necessary that, a meticulous analysis of case should be done

before trial to find out whether the case would end in conviction or

acquittal. If it appeared on a reading of the complaint and consideration

of allegations therein, in light of the statement made on oath that the

ingredients of the offence are disclosed, there would be no justification

for the High Court to interfere. The defences that might be available, or

facts/aspects which when established during trial, might lead to acquittal,

were not grounds for quashing a complaint at the threshold. At that

stage, the only relevant question was whether averments in the complaint

spell out ingredients of a criminal offence or not. The Court has to

consider whether complaint discloses any prima facie offences that were

alleged against the respondents. Correctness or otherwise of the said

allegations has to be decided only during trial. At the initial stage of

issuance of process, it was not open to Courts to stifle proceedings by

entering into merits of the contentions made on behalf of the accused.

Criminal complaints could not be quashed only on the ground that,

allegations made therein appear to be of a civil nature. If ingredients of

. AIR 2019 SC 847

KL,J Crl.P. No.5543 of 2021

offence alleged against Accused were prima facie made out in complaint,

criminal proceeding shall not be interdicted.

9. In Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Private Limited v. The

State of Uttar Pradesh2, the Apex Court referring to the earlier

judgments rendered by it has categorically held that the High Courts in

exercise of its inherent powers under Section - 482 of Cr.P.C has to

quash the proceedings in criminal cases in rarest of rare cases with

extreme caution.

10. In view of the above discussion and the principle laid down in

the above decisions, there are specific allegations which are triable in

nature and have to be decided by the trial Court only after full-fledged

trial, but not at this stage. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined

to quash the proceedings against the petitioner at this stage.

11. The present Criminal Petition is accordingly dismissed.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the

criminal petition shall stand closed.

__________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J 17th January, 2022 Mgr

. AIR 2021 SC 931