Telangana High Court
G. Ravi Kumar vs The State Of Telangana on 17 October, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9014 of 2023
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/accused
No.1 to set aside the docket order dated 01.05.2019 and also to
quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.5904 of 2019
pending on the file of the III Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, for the offences punishable
under Sections 420 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. The brief facts of the case are that having close
acquaintance with accused Nos.1 and 2, respondent No.2 lent an
amount of Rs.6,00,000/- on different dates to accused Nos.1 and
2 for completion of house construction work. In the month of
March, 2013, accused Nos.1 and 2 approached respondent No.2
and promised that they would pay the lent amount within three
months of vacating premises by him. It is also stated that
accused Nos.1 and 2 promised to provide the portion to
respondent No.2. On 12.06.2013, accused Nos.1 and 2 issued
cheques bearing Nos.389994, 389995 and 389996 each for
Rs.50,000/-. However, the said cheques were dishonoured with
an endorsement 'funds insufficient''. Thereafter, when
SKS,J
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9014 of 2023
respondent No.2 asked accused Nos.1 and 2 to return his lent
amount, they threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, a
case was registered vide Crime No.804 of 2013 before the
S.R.Nagar Police and after completion of investigation, charge
sheet was filed vide C.C.No.5904 of 2019 on the file of III
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally,
Hyderabad.
3. Heard Sri T.Bala Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri Arun Kumar Doddla, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State as well as Dr. I.Sujatha,
learned counsel for respondent No.2.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though
the disputes between the parties are civil in nature, respondent
No.2 filed criminal cases only to misuse the process of law. He
further submitted that the allegations levelled against the
petitioner are vague in nature and none of offences alleged
against the petitioner constitute offences much or less than the
alleged offences. In this regard, he placed reliance on the
judgment of the Apex Court in Krishna Lal Chawla and others
SKS,J
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9014 of 2023
v. State of Uttar Pradesh and another 1 and prayed the Court
to allow the Criminal Petition by quashing the proceedings
against the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.2
submitted that the petitioner agreed to return the lent amount
after completion of 24 months i.e., from the date of the petitioner
handing over the portion of the said premises to respondent No.2
for his occupation by the end of May, 2008. He further
submitted that by believing the foul words, respondent No.2 lent
huge amount to the petitioner as investor. He also submitted
that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in
nature and the same requires trial. Hence, he prayed the Court
to dismiss the Criminal Petition.
6. In view of the rival submissions made by both the
parties, this Court has perused the material available on record.
Admittedly, respondent No.2 filed a case against the petitioner in
C.C.No.246 of 2012 before the IV Special Magistrate Kukatpally
at Miyapur, for offences punishable under Section 138 of
Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 and the trial Court observed
that accused was not guilty of the offence under Section 138 of
Criminal Appeal No.283 of 2021
SKS,J
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9014 of 2023
the N.I.Act. Pertinently, both parties are entered into agreement
deed on 17.02.2008 and the sale could not be completed for non
processing of loan as the building did not have BRS for the
construction. It is noteworthy that issuance of cheques issued
for cancellation of the agreement is nothing but a money
recovery case.
7. In case of Krishna Lal Chawla and others, at
paragraph No.21 the Apex Court observed as follows:
"21. ......Other decisions have held that inherent
powers of High Courts provided in Section 482
Cr.P.C. may be utilized to quash criminal
proceedings instituted after great delay, with
vengeful or malafide motives...."
(Emphasis supplied)
8. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in
Krishna Lal Chawla and others and prima facie the disputes
arose between the parties are with regard to the financial
transactions, which are civil in nature, this Court is of the
considered opinion that the continuation of proceedings against
the petitioner in the criminal petition is nothing but abuse of
process of law.
SKS,J
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9014 of 2023
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petitionis allowed by setting
aside the docket order dated 01.05.2019 and consequently, the
proceeding against the petitioner/accused No.1 in C.C.No.5904
of 2019 on the file of the Court of the III Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, are hereby
quashed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also
stand closed.
_______________
K. SUJANA, J
Date: 17.10.2024
gms
