The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P C.,praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Crrmrnal Petrtion, the High Court may be pleased to quash the Criminal Proceedings agalnst the Petitloner/Accused No 3 in C.C.No.479/2021 pending on the file of the Additional Junior Crvil J udge-C u m-Additional Judicial First Class Nilagistrate at Nirmal, Nirmal District. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P C., praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including Appearance of the Petitioner/Accused No.3 in C.C.No.479/2021 pending on the file of Addrtional Junior Civil Judge Cum Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nirmal, Nrrmal District. This Petition comang on for hearing upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri C HARI PREETH, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and of Sri M. Vivekananda Reddy, Asst. Public Prosecutor, for the Respondents. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREE)i \/AS RAO CRII\{INAL PETITION No.487 OF 20.3 ORDER: This Criminal Petition has been filed by the I,ttrrioncriaccused No.3,, seeking to quash the proceedings against hint r C.C.No.479 ol 2021 on the file of the Additional Junior Civil .luclg: cum-Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nirmal, Nirmal I)istrict, lor the oflences punishable under sections 353 and 294(b) rrr, l4 ol thc lndian Penal Code, 1860 (tbr short 'lPC')

2. Heard Mr.C.Hari Preeth, learned counscl for t I I petitioner and Mr.M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Publi.' Prosccutor for respondents

3. Learned counsel for the petitione r submitted r I Lr the petitioner has not cornmitted the alleged offenoes. He fuflher sL on.riltecl tliat thc entire allegations are levelled against accused Nos. and 2, and the petitioner has neither abused respondent No.2/de-factr, :omplainant nor obstructed him from discharging his ofhcial dr r es, hence, the ingredients of the alleged offences are not attra: ed against the petitioner. The pp[iJ4lner has been implicated as accusJ I No.3 solely on 2 the ground that she is the wife of accused No. i. He further submitted that the de-facto oomplainant and other ofhcials illegally removed the cotton crops raised by the petitioner, her family members, and other residents over an extent of Ac.6.00 gts in Jagadamba Tanda, Mamada Mandal, Nirmal District, which had been under cultivation for more than 15 years. However, respondent No.2, along with others, damaged the said crops or1 the allegation that the land belongs to various Govemment departmcnts. Immediately thereafter, one Ade Premabai along with the petitioner and other afl'ccted persons submitted a representation before the District Coilector, Nirmal District, on

28.07.2021, seeking compensation for the loss of crops over the said extent of land and also for grant of RoFR pattas under the provisions of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, and the said representation is still pending consideration. He furthe r submitted that after knowing about the said representation, respondent No.2 lodged the present complaint as a counterblast with an intention to harass the petitioner, though the ingredients of the alleged offences are not attracted against her. Hence, the initiation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner 3 is a clear abusc of the process of law and the 526p, is liable to be quashed.

4. Per contra, the leamed Assistant Public ProsecLt )r submitted that the petitioner does not have semblance of right or nterest ovcr the subject propefty and she, along with others, had illegal y trespassed and raised cotton crops. When respondent No.2 and othtr ofhcials visited the site and recorded videos and took photogrirpr.; o1'the iltegal cultivation, the petitioner and the other accused obstr Lcted them frotn discharging their official duties. The investigali r 1 otficer, alter conducting investigation, filed charge sheet in which thr: specil'rc role of the petitioner has been mentioned. He further sL I mitted that the grounds raised by the petitioner involve disputed 11 restittns of fact, which can only be adjudicated during the course of trii l. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashing of pro:.:edings in C.C No.479 of 2021 . Hence, the petition is liable to be disr o issed

5. Having considered the rival submissions made lr1, tlie respective parties and after perusal of the material available on ecord, it reveals that on 28.07.2021, one Ade Premabai, along with lre petitioner and others, submitted a representation to the District I rllector, Nirmal 4 District, requesting compensation for the loss of crops over an area of Ac.6.00 guntas of land located at Jagadamba Tanda. They have also stated that they had been cultivating this land and growing cotton crops for over 15 years. It was also rnentioned that on the same day, respondent No.2, along rvith others, damaged the said crops on the allegation that the land belongs to various Govemrncnt departments. In the said representation, they also requesred the District Collector to issue RoFR pattas and also issue pattadar passbooks and the said representation is pending consideration

6. The specific contention of the learned counsel ibr the petitioner is subsequent 'd ...: ."t\d the submission of the representation dated

28.07.2021, respondent No.2, with an obiique morive, lodged the present complaint against the petitioner and others on the very same date as a counterblast to the said representation.

7. After perusal of the charge sheet and the cornplaint, it reveals that there are no specihc allegations levelled against the petitioner, and the entire allegations are levelled against the other accused. The only allegation against the petitioner is that she was accompanying accused No. 1, who is none other than her husband. 5 8 In view of the foregoing reasons, this Courl i: rf tlLe considered view that the proceedings initiated against the petitkrrr r in C.C. No.479 o12021 are clear abuse of the process of law and the ame are liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the proceedings initie r.cd against the petitioner in C.C.No.479 of 2021 on the file of the 'tdditional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Judicial First Class Ma: strate at Nirmal, Nirmai District are hereby quashed.

9. Accordingiy, the criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall st; rd closed. SDi- MOHD.ISMAIL TIEPUTY REGISTRAR (z SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, ' I?fi:lliiffilJYJll,"?J,"',,, Judse-cum-Additionar Judiciar Firs crass r\/asisrrate at 2. The S.H.O., p.S. Mamada, Dist: Nrrmal 3. One CC to SRt. C HARI PREETH Advocate [OpUC] 4. One CC ro THE pUBLiC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, HYDE:f :ABAD [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies PSI, I HIGH COURT DATED:1 910812025 /& f o l{ t- c{- ,.) ,t .s! 4,; * s\. + HgtH*lj r: :-;Ai' I r); 2' ORDER CRLP.No.487 of 2023 ALLOWING THE CRLP Ie\*