B.Durga Benarji v. State By Telangana

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1597 OF 2019 Between:

B.Durga Bglali, S/o. Late B.Ranga Prasad, Aged about 48 years, Occ. Busines_s, R1o P]ot No.230, F_lqt No.302, Ravindra Society, Madhipur, Ranga Re_ddy District. Rep. by his GPA Holder Smt.Bellamkonda Kiranmayee, W-o. B.Durga Benarji, Aged about 37 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o.plot No.230, Flat No.302, Ravindra Society, Madhapur, Ranga Reddy District. Smt.Bellamkonda_Kiranmayee, Wo. B.Durga Benarji, Aged about 37 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o.Plot No.230, Flat No.302, Ravindra Society, / Madhapur, Ranga Reddy Dishict.

B.Jayaram_Nailu, S/o. Late B.Ranga Prasad, Aged about 43 years, Occ. Businels, R/o. Plot No.249, Flat No.201, Ravindra-Society, Madhdpur, Ranga Reddy District.

9mt.B.Vimala, W/o. Late B.Ranga Prasad, Aged about 68 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. PIot No.230, Flat No.302, Ravindra Society,- Madhapur, Ranga Reddy Diskict.

BRam B_abu, S/o.K.Bangaraiah, Aged about 47 years, Occ. Govt.Employee, Office of Tirbal Corporation Marketing Developmen (Federation oi thOa Limited, Nampally, Hyderabad).

...Petitioners/A1, A2, A3, AG & A7

AND State by _Telangana, Station House Officer, Madhapur (Guttala) Police Station ,- Cyberabad Re.p. by Public Prosecutor for the State of Telangana High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad, Malneedi Mahesh S/o.M.Subba Rao, Aged about 44 years, Occ. Business, Rl/o Plot No'256' Kavuri Hills' Madhapir' cyberabad"

...Respondents

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in CC.No.367512018 on the file of the XXV Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally, Miyapur, Cyberabad.

l.A. NO: 1OF 2019 Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in cc.No.3675/201g on ihe file of the XXV Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally, Miyapur, Cyberabad, pendirrg disposal of the petition.

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri B. s. Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and the public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and for the Respondent No. 2 None appeared. The Court made the following: ORDER

t) THE HONOURABLE SRI TIUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITIO N No.1597 of2OL9 ORDER:

i.

This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.3675 of 2018 pending on the file of XXV Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally, Miyapur. The offences registered against the petitioners are under Sections 420, 506, 406, 720-lB- r /w 34 IpC.

t,

2. The 2"d respondent filed a private complaint before the Court which is referred to the police for the purpose of ll i l investigation. The case of the defacto complainant is that he agreed to purchase a property standing in the name of ,A1 for a total consideration of Rs.4,4O,OO,0O0/-. In pursuance of the said agreement, Rs.2.OO Crores was paid to A1 in the presence of petitioners 2 to 5. Al acknowledged the payment and issued receipts of various dates. However, A 1 failed to execute the registered sale deed and also clear the bank loan as promised by him.

7,o 3.

On the basis of the said complaint, case was investigated and charge sheet was filed against seven accused for the offences of cheating and criminal misappropriation. 4.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the transactions are purely civil in nature pertaining to the sale transaction of the property. In the event of failure to register the property, the defacto complainant has remedy to approach the Civil Court and file suit for specihc performance. Only to settle civil disputes, criminal complaint was filed.

5. On the other had, it was argued on behalf of the respondents that huge amount of Rs.2.00 Crore was taken and acknowledged by A1. Apparently, the accused had intention to cheat the 2'd respondent which is evident from the fact that having received the amount, registration was not done.

6. It is an admitted fact that the property belongs to A1 and the amount of Rs.2.00 Crore was handed over to A.1, for which

-7/ ,/6 ,/ A1 executed receipts. In respect of petitioners 2 to 5 who are A2, A3, -.{6 and A7, it is stated that they were having knowledge of the transaction and also assured the defacto complainant that the property will be registered in his name 7 .

It is not the case that any of the petitioners 2 to 5 have in any manner made any false statement or induced the defacto complainant into parting with the amount which was given to A1. The property stands in the name of A1 and amounts were received by A1. Only for the reason that the petitioners 2 to 5, who are close relatives of A1, they cannot be mulcted with criminal liability on the bald allegation of the petitioners 2 to 5 assuring that the property would be registered and amounts were given in their Presence.

8.

To attract an offence of cheating, there has to be an act of deception. Pursuant to the deception played by a person, a person should have delivered the property. There is no such allegation insofar as the petitioners 2 to 51A2, ,q,3, A6 and A7 are concerned.

n

o

9. In the result, the proceedings against the petitioners 2 to 5/A2, A3, ,46 and A7 in C.C.No.36ZS of 2018 on the file of XXV Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally, Miyapur, Cyberabad, are hereby quashed. However, the trial Court shall proceed against A1.

10.

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is partly allowed Consequently, miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

SD/. V. KAVITHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (; ,"

L SECTION OFFICER To, '1. The XXV Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally, Miyapur, Cyberabad

2. The Station House Officer, Madhapur (Guttala) Police Station, Cyberabad.

3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, (OUT)

4. One CC to Sri B. S. Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

5. Two CD Copies Pb/JAK w I //TRUE COPY//

(--'

HIGH COURT i:

-_t DATED: 3010112024 . .ii..

{j'#t.r, : -4.ii ,^ - r,- Stliqf.j j.:r j .' .1"

t-i \,- Il 'i r'l,, ila c .L

ORDER

.,:-.

'\).'

, * '--:.-_ GRLP.No.1597 of 2019 .,} l;,:

PARTLY ALLOWING GRIMINAL PETITION !'

8 .s'A w ;1{21 :

j cJ ?

:,