Kovvuri Anil Kumar v. State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER CRIMINAL PETITION No.522 OF 2018 ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the petitioners-A.3 and A.7 seeking to quash the proceedings in crime No.6 of 2018 of Ameenpur police station, Sanga Reddy district registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 409, 464, 465, 468, 471 and 420 IPC.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State and perused the record.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that names of petitioners-A.3 and A.7 are not mentioned in the First Information Report; that they have nothing to do with the alleged premises and construction of house at Ameenpur village and also with no objection certificates; that the allegations made against these petitioners do not constitute the offences alleged as indicated above, and ultimately, prayed to quash the impugned proceedings.

4.

On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of relief sought in the Criminal Petition.

5.

The material on record reveals that petitionerA.3, who is an M.P.T.C. member of Jayalakshmi Nagar, was approached for permissions and no objection certificate for construction of house within the limits of Ameenpur grampanchayat, and that the petitioner-A.3 promised to get

the same and demanded Rs.90,000/- to get permission for one plot, and has taken Rs.1,80,000/- to get permission in respect of two plots bearing Nos. 321/P and 320/P. Thereafter, it has come to light that the permissions were fabricated and were not issued by the authorities concerned. Huge money changed hands in this case. There is also allegation that through petitioner-A.7, A.8 issued 12 fake permissions for which he took Rs.25,000/- for each plot. There are specific and grave allegations constituting the offences alleged against the petitioners-A.3 and A.7 as indicated above. Hence, continuation of the impugned proceedings against the petitioners-A.3 and A.7 would not be abuse of process of Court. The Criminal Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 6.

Having argued the matter for some time, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he intends to withdraw the Criminal Petition. In the facts and circumstances of the case, as there is material against the petitioners, investigation can be proceeded with and it is not appropriate to accord permission for withdrawal of the Criminal Petition as sought for.

7.

In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. ____________________________ DR.SHAMEEM AKTHER, J DATED: 30.1.2018 DRK

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER CRIMINAL PETITION No. 522 OF 2018 30.1.2018 DRK