Mallela Srinivas Yadav v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTI CE SHAMEEM AKTHER CRI MI NAL PETI TI ON No.1 1 3 1 OF 2 0 1 9 ORDER:

This Criminal Petition, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is filed by the petitioner/ A.2, for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.828 of 2018 of Madhapur Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420 and 471 read with 120B of IPC. 2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/ A.2, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondentState and perused the record. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner/ A.2 would contend that the petitioner is an innocent person and is not responsible for fraudulent sale of any immovable property. A false criminal case is foisted against the petitioner/ A.2 and ultimately, prayed to allow the petition.

4.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner/ A.2 and contended that the petitioner/ A.2 along with another person executed and registered several sale deeds by personating the original owner-Syed Mouniddin. In that process, he collected lakhs of rupees. The allegations against the petitioner/ A.2 are grave and ultimately prayed to dismiss the petition.

5.

As per the FIR lodged with the police dated 09.10.2018, one Syed Mouniddin is the original owner of agricultural land admeasuring Acs.2.00 in Sy.No.160/ AA situated at

Somaram Village, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. By personating the said owner, three registered sale deeds bearing document No.881/ 2016 dated 22.01.2016, document No.550/ 2016 dated 12.01.2016 and document No.521/ 2016 dated 12.01.2016 were brought into existence. It is also specifically mentioned that the petitioner/ A.2 had signed as a witness to the registered sale deeds bearing document Nos.520 and 521 of 2016 dated 12.01.2016 before the Joint Sub-Registrar, Ranga Reddy District. There are specific allegations against the petitioner/ A.2 with regard to creating bogus documents and collecting huge money from the purchasers though the land do not belongs to the person, who executed the three sale deeds. The gravity of offence is high. The subject matter requires thorough custodial interrogation. Hence, it is not a fit case to allow the petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. 6.

In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition, shall stand closed.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DR. SHAMEEM AKTHER, J Date: 05.03.2019 ssp