Telangana High Court
P. Sunil Kumar vs The State Of Telangana on 12 March, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.4014 OF 2020
JUDGMENT:
1. This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings against
the petitioner/A10 in C.C.No.399 of 2017, registered for the
offences under Sections 467, 468, 471, 406, 409, 420, 511 r/w 34
of IPC, on the file of XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at
Hyderabad.
2. The petitioner, who earlier worked as employee in the Greater
Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC), was arrayed as A10 in
the charge sheet. A complaint was filed by the Superintendent
Engineer of GHMC stating that his predecessor officers, who are the
Executive Engineers of GHMC, entered into a contract with the
contractors enlisted in the GHMC for the execution of desilting of
Nalas in the Central Zone. The contractor, while submitting the
weighbridge bills for payments, has submitted fake and fabricated
bills in the office of the Executive Engineer, and has also
fraudulently used non-transportation vehicles for transportation of
the desilted material. Thus, it is alleged that the contractors have
committed fraud by submitting fake bills and fraudulently using
non transport vehicles for transporting the desilted material,
causing loss to the GHMC.
3. On the basis of the said complaint, a crime was registered by
the CCS, Hyderabad. After concluding investigation, a charge sheet
was laid against the petitioner/A10 and also A1 to A9.
4. During the course of investigation, witnesses were examined
and weigh bills were also seized. According to the investigation, the
petitioners/A10, had entered the details of fake bills in the MB
Books.
5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner/A10 would submit that the Commissioner, GHMC
addressed a letter to the Engineer-in-Chief, Public Health & ME
Department, Telangana State, dated 10.01.2020. In the said letter,
it is mentioned that there was no financial loss to the GHMC, and
no weighbridge was erected/installed, and further no department
staff were deployed for monitoring by the concerned Dy.
Commissioner. The bills for desilting were not received by the
accounts section for making payment and there is no loss to
GHMC.
6. The said document is a letter, which is addressed to the
Engineer-in-Chief and signed on behalf of the Commissioner,
GHMC. The said letter cannot be looked into in the present quash
proceedings to arrive at a conclusion that the allegations leveled
against the petitioners are incorrect. The said letter has to be
proved during trial. The admissibility of the letter and the
correctness of the contents of the letter cannot be determined in
this quash petition.
7. Learned Senior Counsel also relied on the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.Raghavender v. State of Andhra
Pradesh, CBI 1. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, while dealing with a
case of criminal misappropriation, held that when there was no loss
to the Bank and conspiracy was not proved, conviction cannot be
sustained. Learned Senior Counsel submits that once there is no
loss, a suspicion, however strong, cannot form basis to prosecute
the petitioners.
8. In the judgment cited by the learned Senior Counsel in the
case of N.Raghavender, the Hon'ble Supreme Court was dealing
(2021) 18 Supreme Court Cases 70
with a case which was tried and convicted by the Special Court. On
the basis of the evidence adduced during the course of trial, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court found that the ingredients of cheating and
conspiracy were not made out.
9. In a case of discharge before the trial Court or quash
proceedings before this Court, the Court has to see whether a prima
facie case is made out and whether there is a strong suspicion
regarding the involvement of the accused.
10. This Court cannot rely on any documents, filed during quash
proceedings unless such documents are admitted by both the
parties and can be relied upon by this Court, without any further
proof.
11. The document filed before this Court is a letter that was
addressed by the Commissioner, GHMC to the Engineer-in-Chief,
Public Health Department. The said letter was signed on behalf of
the Commissioner, GHMC. The said letter cannot be looked into at
this stage in quash proceedings. The author of the said letter has to
be examined, and the contents have to be proved in accordance
with law before the Court below, before accepting the contents of
the document, that there is no loss to GHMC or that bills were not
raised by the contractors.
12. Option is left open to the petitioner to raise all the grounds in
the Court below.
13. Accordingly, Criminal Petition is dismissed. Consequently,
miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date: 12.03.2025
kvs
