Prosecutor High Court · 2025

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 against the Petitioners/ Accused NO. 4 and 7 in CC. No. 4007 of 2021 on the file of XIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad at Rajendranagar (now pendirig before the Xll Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate at Rajendranagar) in the interest of justice; l.A. NO: 1 OF 2023 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 including appearance of the Petitioners/Accused No. 4 and 7 in CC. No. 4007 of 2O21 on the file of XIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad at Rajendranagar (now pending before the Xll Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate at Rajendranagar), This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri VIKHAR AHMED, Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri E.Ganesh, Asst. Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and Sri Mirza Saifulla Baig, Advocate for the Respondent No.2; The Court made the following ORDER: _r*;: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL PETITION No.l1852 OF 2O2g /' ORDER: This (lriminal Petition is filed by petitioners / accused Nos.4 and 7 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.4r)O7 of 2027 on the frle of the learned XIV Additionai Metropolitan Magistrate, Cvberabad at Raj endranagar.

2. Hearcl Mr. Vikhar Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. E.Ganesh, learned Assistant public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State and Mr. Mirza Sahulll Baig, learned counsel for tLLe respondent No.2.

3. The brief facts of the case are that respondr:nt No.2 lodged a complaint against the petitioners and others on 08.1 1.2O 18 alleging thal they have created fake document..; to grab his property i.e,, plot bearing No.311/ 1 in Block No.C, S1..No.1134/2{) admeasuring 3O4.50 Sq.yards situated at Mailardevpallv Viilage, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Bas;ing on the said facts, Crime No.911 of 2018 was registered against the petitioners and others for the offences 't-"' I i 2 E\{/,J crlp 11852-2023 punishable under Sections'42O' 423' 468' 471 and 120(Et) ot I.P.C. Learned counsel for the petltloners submitted that the 4. petitioner No.1 herein has purchased the subiect property from through registered Sale Deed his vendor Muneera Begum dated 17.O6.2013, in turn the bearing Doc.No'4906/2013' same through registered vendor of the petitioner purchased the , dated 16.1O'2004' from Sale Deed bearing Doc No 868O/2004 her vendor S A Abbasi' whercas S A'Abbasi purchased the said property from the respondent No 2 herein through Agreement of Sale dated 19'04 2OOO Petitioner No' 1 being absolute owner and possessor of the subject property has sold the said property through his GPA i e ' petitioner No'2 herein through registered Sale Deed dated 19'O9'2O 15' Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that 5. the ingredients of the Sections mentioned in the above complaint does not attracts the offences alleged against the petitioners' The Police without conducting any preliminary enquiry registered the above case and frled charge sheet only to harass the petitioners' that the alleg{tqls le5lled against the , ) \ =T-:.W ,,7 / I I I I I I I i i i 3 F]W,J crlp- 1 1852 2023 pctitionor:i iry rcspondent No.2 are purely cilil in nature Thereforc, ht, s<:eks to quash the impugned proceedings.

6. Opposirrg tlte same, Iearned counsel for r<,spondent No.2 would subnrit thzrt unless and until a fufl-fledged trial is conduct,:d, tlre truth cannot be elicited. Therefort:, he seeks to dismiss lhr' ( rirninal I)erition.

7. I{irving rcgard to the submissions made by both the ) ) Ie arne<l cou r st.l and relying upon the decisicirL passed thc Hon'ble Supremc Court in M/s.Neeharika lnfrastructute t I Private Limited Vs. State of Maharashtra and Othersr, this Court is ol tlr opinion that the Court while quashing the F.l.R., by excru:isinr, ltower under Section 482 of Cr.p.C., has to consider u,hr.ther thr: allegations in the F.l.R disclosc the commission of tr cognizable offence or not; the Court is r-rot re<luircd to cr u.rsicler on merits, whether or not, the merits of the allegations m;rke out zr cognizable offence and the Court has to permit '-hc investigating agency/police to inrestigate the allegations irr thc F.l.R. Hence, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Crirninal Petition at this stage and the Criminal petition is lrable to bc dismissed. '1zozt1 + s c.R. 1044 I , I 4 EW,J crlp 11852 2023

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. The Petitioners are at liberty to work out the alternate remedies, as available under law. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- L. LAKSHMI BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR S TION OFFICER To

1. The XIV Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate' Cyberabad at Rajendranagar i. fn" strtion House dfficer, Mailardevpally P S , Cyberabad g. On" CC.to SRl. VIKHAR AHMED Advocate^[OPUC] ;. i;; ccJL pueLrC pnoseduron' High court at Hvderabad (oUT) 5. Two CD CoPies VSI\,4/PR , ! HIGH COURT DATED:3010112025 I ORDER CRLP.No.11852 of 2023 r: a'L-rt -)o 'r( t t $ t D E $I$ ?ffi ,l t/ ..\-1 ,/ p rrl9v,.2" =--4* DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION 2^ \ 7b