Mohammed Raheem, And Another vs State Of Telangana, And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 2343 Tel

            HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

            CRIMINAL PETITION No.2308 OF 2021

ORDER:

Heard Mr. Vedula Srinivas, learned Senior Counsel for the

petitioners, Mr. K. Chaitanya, learned counsel for respondent No.2

and learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent

No.1.

2. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section - 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code') to quash

the proceedings in C.C. No.1181 of 2018 on the file of the IX

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

3. The petitioners herein are arraigned as accused Nos.1 and

2 in the said C.C. The offences alleged against them are under

Sections - 419, 384 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code,

1860 (for short 'IPC').

4. Respondent No.2 herein, de facto complainant, has filed a

complaint under Section - 200 of the Cr.P.C. before the IX

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, which in

turn, referred the same under Section - 156 (3) of Cr.P.C., to the

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

Station House Officer, Narayanguda Police Station, Hyderabad

City Commisionerate, for investigation and report. The contents of

the said complaint and the allegations levelled against the

petitioners herein and one Smt.Shaik Zareen Hussain, are as under:

i) De facto complainant is the Muthawali of Sir Nizamath

Jung and Zeenath Unnisa Begum Wakf and the President of

ANJUMAN-E-OLM-O-AMAL, which is formed to manage and

control the properties endowed by Sir Nizamath Jung and Zeenath

Unnisa Begum for the welfare of poor Muslim Society.

ii) As per the objectives of Wakfnama of the above said

Trust, there shall be six (06) members to manage the affairs of the

Wakf properties. Out of the said six (06) members, three shall be

from the family of Sir Nizamath Jung and the remaining three shall

be others having good education and character.

iii) The President of the said Society should be eldest

Member in the family of Sir Nizamath Jung and Member of

ANJUMAN-E-OLM-O-AMAL.

iv) The youngest son of late Mohd. Hussain, the then

Muthawali, impersonating himself as the President, constituted a

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

fake society and filed an application vide O.A. No.10 of 2010

which was later renumbered as O.A. No.18 of 2016 on the file of

Wakf Tribunal, Telangana State.

v) After the death of Mohd. Hussain, his wife, accused

No.3, Smt. Shaik Zareen Hussain, representing him as his legal

heir, along with the petitioners herein, fabricated the proceedings

said to have issued by the Chief Executive Officer of the Wakf

Board. Based on the said fabricated proceedings, the de facto

complainant, respondent No.2 herein, was disqualified for

appointment as Muthawali by the Wakf Tribunal in I.A. No.411 of

2011.

vi) Petitioner No.1 herein styled himself as the son-in-law of

accused No.3 fabricated Letter-heads, stamps and impersonated

himself as the President, while petitioner No.2 herein as the

Secretary of the aforesaid Society. In fact, they do not fall in the

Hierarchy of Sir Nizamath Jung, but in order to grab the properties

of the said Society, they created a fake society and started

harassing and blackmailing the tenants of the said Wakf properties

to pay the money.

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

vii) The petitioners herein and accused No.3 never the

members of ANJUMAN-E-ILM-O-AMAL and not eligible to

become the Members of the said Society. The petitioners and

accused No.3 have created fake letter-heads and stamps posing

themselves as the persons at the helm of the affairs of ANJUMAN-

E-ILM-O-AMAL Society and thereby caused huge loss and

tarnished the image of the society.

5. Pursuant to the said complaint, the Police had registered a

case in Crime No.04 of 2018 against the petitioners herein and

another for the offences under Sections - 120B, 419, 467, 468, 471,

384 and 506 read with 34 of IPC and took up investigation.

6. During the course of investigation, the Investigating

Officer has collected the material and examined the witnesses. On

examination of the material and the statements of the witnesses

recorded under Section - 161 of the Cr.P.C., the Investigating

Officer has filed the charge sheet against the petitioners herein for

the offences under Sections - 419, 384 and 506 read with 34 of IPC

against the petitioners herein, and the same was taken on file vide

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

C.C. No.1181 of 2018 by the learned IX Additional Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, to proceed with trial.

7. The petitioners herein have filed the present criminal

petition to quash the proceedings in the said C.C.

8. Mr. Vedula Srinivas, learned senior counsel for the

petitioners, would submit that the complaint filed by respondent

No.2 herein before the Magistrate is not maintainable and the same

is nothing but an abuse of legal process. Originally, Sir Nizamath

Jung Wakf is a notified Wakf published in A.P. Gazettee No.17,

dated 20.04.1979. Late Sir Nizamath Jung and his Sister

Zeenathunnisa Begum had endowed several immovable properties

and registered them with Wakf Board. The said Sir Nizamath Jung

was the Muthawali of the said Wakf Institution. As per the Wakf

Deed, eldest member of the family should be the Member of

ANJUMAN-E-ILM-O-AMAL and unanimously elected by the

Board of Trustees shall be the Successor of the Wakf. He would

submit that after the demise of the original Muthawali, Sir

Nizamath Jung, his younger brother, Azeemuddin Ahmed was

appointed as Muthawali. After his death, his youngest son,

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

Ruknuddin Ahmed was appointed as the Muthawali, who died on

04.05.2002. The Wakf Board had issued proceedings dated

15.12.2005 appointing respondent No.2 herein as the Muthawali,

but he was placed under suspension on 11.04.2007 on account of

several irregularities committed by him. However, later, his

appointment was regularized by the Wakf Board vide proceedings

dated 30.09.2009.

i) The learned senior counsel would also submit that the

proceedings dated 30.09.2009 were questioned by Mr. Mohd.

Hussain, son of late Ruknuddin Ahmed, who is also a Member of

ANJUMAN-E-ILM-O-AMAL before the Wakf Tribunal at

Hyderabad in O.A. No.18 of 2016 under Section - 83 (2) of the

Wakf Act, 1995, along with an interlocutory application seeking

suspension of the said proceedings vide I.A. No.411 of 2010, and

the Wakf Tribunal vide orders dated 12.07.2011 granted interim

orders suspending the said proceedings in I.A. No.411 of 2010.

During pendency of said O.A. No.18 of 2016, the applicant, Mohd.

Hussain died and his wife, Shaik Zarina Hussain came on record as

his legal heir vide orders dated 10.12.2012 in I.A. No.591 of 2012.

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

Ultimately, O.A. No.18 of 2016 was dismissed by the Wakf

Tribunal vide order dated 25.04.2017 confirming the proceedings

dated 30.09.2009 issued by the Wakf Board. Aggrieved by the

same, Mrs. Shaik Zarina Hussain preferred a revision before this

Court vide C.R.P.No.3829 of 2017. Further aggrieved by the very

same orders of the Wakf Tribunal, one Nizamuddin Ahmed,

President of ANJUMAN-E-ILM-O-AMAL, filed a separate

revision vide C.R.P. No.4351 of 2017. Both the CRPs were

clubbed together and passed a common interim order by this Court

on 21.09.2017 directing the Wakf Board to manage the subject

Wakf Institution till the disposal of the said CRPs. In the said

orders, this Court observed that neither of the parties to the lis shall

be in the management of the Wakf Institution. In view of the same,

respondent No.2 herein is not functioning as Muthawali of the

aforesaid society since 12.07.2011. Now, the Wakf Institution is

under the direct management of the Wakf Board.

ii) Learned senior counsel for the petitioners would further

submit that respondent No.2 herein has not mentioned in the

complaint with regard to the aforesaid proceedings. In the

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

complaint, respondent No.2 herein has falsely described himself as

the Muthawali of the Wakf.

iii) Learned senior counsel would also submit that the

society named, ANJUMAN-E-ILM-O-AMAL, has been in

existence for more than 70 years and its reference was also

mentioned in the Wakf Deed itself. Therefore, the contention of

respondent No.2 that the said society was created with an intention

to grab the properties of the Wakf is incorrect. To manage the

properties of the Wakf and to fulfill the objectives of the Wakf, the

said society was registered in the year 2016 by nine persons

consists of the petitioner herein and Mrs. Shaik Zarina Hussain

along with four other persons. The membership underwent a

change in the year 2019 under a valid acknowledgment issued by

the Registrar on 23.09.2019.

iv) Learned senior counsel would further submit that

pending the decision in the aforesaid CRPs, respondent No.2

cannot create a parallel litigation by filing the present complaint.

The police did not conduct the investigation properly and filed the

charge sheet in a routine manner. Thus, the proceedings in the

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

aforesaid CC cannot be continued. With the said submissions, he

sought to quash the proceedings in the aforesaid C.C.

9. On the other hand, Mr. K. Chaitanya, learned counsel

appearing on behalf of respondent No.2, would submit that there is

no bar for respondent No.2 to file a private complaint during

pendency of the aforesaid revisions. The petitioners herein have

brought another society, named ANJUMAN-E-ILM-O-AMAL in

the year 2016 by fabricating the letter heads and seals with an

intention to mislead the tenants so as to collect the rents from the

tenants of the Wakf property as if they are In-charge of the

properties.

i) He would further submit that the petitioners herein have

filed a petition vide Crl.M.P. No.1326 of 2019 seeking their

discharge in the aforesaid C.C. and the same is pending for

consideration. During pendency of the discharge petition, the

petitioners herein approached this Court by filing the present

petition. Further, the petitioners have not made out any ground for

quashing the proceedings in the said C.C. The grounds raised by

the petitioners in the present petition are all triable issues and the

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

same would be decided by the trial Court in the aforesaid C.C. after

full-fledged trial, but not in a petition filed under Section - 482 of

the Cr.P.C. With the said submissions, he sought to dismiss the

present petition.

ii) Learned Public Prosecutor would submit that there are

specific allegations against the petitioners herein which are serious

in nature. The police having examined the material collected

during the course of investigation including the statements of the

witnesses recorded under Section -161 of the Cr.P.C., filed the

charge sheet against the petitioners herein. The defences taken by

the petitioners in the present petition cannot be considered in the

present petition as the same have to be tried and decided by the

trial Court after full-fledged trial. With the said submissions, he

sought to dismiss the present criminal petition.

10. In the aforesaid factual backdrop of the case, it is to be

seen whether the petitioners are entitled for the relief sought in the

present petition. Perusal of the record would reveal that the

disputes with regard to the appointment of respondent No.2 as

Muthawali by the Wakf Board and whether the society named

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

ANJUMAN-E-ILM-O-AMAL is a created one or not etc., are the

issues which are subject matters of the aforesaid Civil Revision

Petitions. Whether the petitioners have forged and fabricated the

letter heads and seals and created the society named ANJUMAN-

E-ILM-O-AMAL is a triable issue which has to be decided by the

trial Court after full-fledged trial, but not by this Court in a petition

filed under Section - 482 of the Cr.P.C. It is also alleged in the

charge sheet that the petitioners herein continued with the said fake

society impersonating them as President and Secretary of the said

society and threatened the tenants to pay the rents to them is also a

trial issue which cannot be decided by this Court in the present

petition as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kamal Shivaji

Pokarnekar v. The State of Maharashtra1. In the said case, the

Apex Court 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

. AIR 2019 SC 847

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

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 offence alleged against Accused were prima facie

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

made out in complaint, criminal proceeding shall not be

interdicted.

11. Prima facie, there are specific allegations against both

the petitioners herein. The contents of the charge sheet constitute

the aforesaid offences. Therefore, the contention of learned senior

counsel that the contents of the charge sheet lack the ingredients of

the offences alleged against the petitioners herein is unsustainable.

In a petition filed under Section - 482 of the Cr.P.C., this Court

cannot scrutinize the evidence, both oral and documentary and its

validity and genuineness. It is the duty of trial Court.

12. 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.

. AIR 2021 SC 931

KL,J Crl. P No.2308 of 2021

13. In view of the above discussion, prima facie, there are

specific allegations against the petitioners herein with regard to

impersonation, cheating and extortion etc. The Investigating

Officer during the course of investigation recorded the statements

of relevant witnesses including the tenants etc. and on

consideration of the same only filed the charge sheet. As already

stated above, truthfulness or otherwise of the allegation is not fit to

be gone into at this stage as it is always a matter of trial. Further,

the petitioners herein have not made out any ground to quash the

proceedings in the aforesaid C.C. Thus, the present petition is

devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed.

14. The present Criminal Petition is accordingly dismissed.

As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending

in the Criminal Petition stand closed.

____________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J th 6 June, 2022 Mgr