Mr.G.Amarnath v. The State Of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY CRIMINAL PETITION No.11914 of 2015 ORDER:

This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused 1 and 2 in Crime No.753 of 2015 of Saroornagar Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 468, 471 and 420 IPC.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is two fold:

i. The second respondent received an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- under two agreements from the petitioners and taken a false plea of forgery.

ii. He further submitted that the second respondentcomplainant filed the present complaint with an ulterior motive to harass the petitioners.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that this is not the stage to go into the merits of the main case. A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 and the second respondent is the de facto complainant in Crime No.753 of 2015. As per the allegations made in the complaint, the petitioners herein produced the forged memorandum of understanding dated 21.12.2014 and the agreement of sale dated 06.07.2015. Whether these petitioners have fabricated the memorandum of understanding and the agreement of sale will come to light during the course of

investigation.

It is needless to say that the court has to take into consideration the allegations made in the complaint while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., in order to quash the criminal proceedings at the initial stage of investigation. The court is not justified in embarking upon an enquiry to ascertain the truthfulness, genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint. It is a settled principle of law that the inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate investigation. If the allegations made in the complaint do not constitute the offence much less the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioners, then this court can quash the proceedings in order to prevent abuse of process of court thereby to secure the ends of justice.

I have carefully perused the allegations made in the complaint in order to ascertain whether the allegations made in the complaint are patently absurd and inherently improbable thereby to quash the proceedings. The material available on record is prima facie sufficient to investigate into the matter in order to ascertain the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the principle enunciated in R.P.KAPOOR v. STATE OF PUNJAB[1], STATE OF HARYANA v. BHAJAN LAL[2], V.Y.JOSE V STATE OF GURAJAT[3] AND TEEJA DEVI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN[4], I am of the considered view that this is not a fit case to quash the criminal proceedings at the threshold.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the concerned Station House Officer may be directed not to arrest the petitioners till completion of the investigation. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court i n ARNESH KUMAR v. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER[5], the Station House Officer, Saroornagar Police Station, Ranga Reddy District, is hereby directed to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. in Crime No.753 of 2015, so far as the petitioners/Accused are concerned. With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

_____________________ T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J Date: 17.11.2015 Rns [1] AIR 1960 SC 866 [2] AIR 1992 SC 604

[3] (2009) 3 SCC 78 [4] 2015 (1) ACR 564 (SC) [5] 2014 (8) SCALE 250