Telangana High Court
D.V. Anand Raj, vs The State Telangana, on 12 February, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL PETITION No.11177 OF 2023
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the
petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.2, seeking to quash the
proceedings against him in C.C.No.339 of 2021 pending on the
file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mahaboobnagar, registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Heard Ms. Vaishnavi, learned counsel for the
petitioner/accused No.1 and Mr. E. Ganesh, learned Assistant
Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 - State. Though notice
was served, none appeared on behalf of respondent
No.2/complainant.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though
the petitioner is not involved in the alleged transactions between
accused No.1 and the husband of respondent No.2 in any
manner, accused No.1 and respondent No. 2 besides insisting
the petitioner for repayment of the said amount, also threatened
him with dire consequences. He also submitted that the
petitioner was implicated in the case with false and fabricated
allegations without there being any corroborative evidence. He
also submitted that the petitioner neither the drawer of the
alleged cheque issued in favour of husband of respondent No.2
nor a surety for the repayment of the alleged amount. Hence, he
prayed the Court to allow the Criminal Petition by quashing the
proceedings against the petitioner.
4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor
submitted that there are serious allegations against the
petitioner, which requires trial for eliciting the true facts of the
case. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal
Petition.
5. In view of the submissions made by both the parties, this
Court has perused the material evidence available on record. It is
apparent that even as per the statement of respondent No.2,
there is no mention of specific allegation against the petitioner,
which itself establishes that false allegations have been levelled
against the petitioner.
6. At this stage, it is relevant to note the observations made by
the Apex Court in State of Haryana and others vs.
Bhajanlal 1, whereunder the following categories were
illustrated, wherein the extraordinary power under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India or the inherent powers under Section
482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised by the High Court to prevent the
abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of
justice. The said categories are extracted as under:
"1. Where the allegations made in the First
Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken
at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not
prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case
against the accused.
2. Where the allegations in the First Information
Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR
do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an
investigation by police officers under Section 156 (1) of the
Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the
purview of Section 155 (2) of the Code.
3. Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the
FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of
the same do not disclose the commission of any offence
and make out a case against the accused.
4. Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute
a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable
offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer
without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under
Section 155 (2) of the Code.
5. Where the allegations made in the FIR or
complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the
basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just
conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding
against the accused.
6. Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of
the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under
which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution
and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is
1992 supp (1) SCC 335
a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act,
providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the
aggrieved party.
7. Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended
with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously
instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance
on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private
and personal grudge."
7. This Court, having respectful agreement with the view taken by
the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment, is of the considered opinion
that even if the trial is conducted, no purpose would be served and
there are no other specific allegations against the petitioner.
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is Allowed and the proceedings
against the petitioner/accused No.2 in C.C.No.339 of 2021 pending on
the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mahaboobnagar, are hereby
quashed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand
closed.
____________________
E.V. VENUGOPAL J
Date: 12.02.2025
fm
