Dismissed

Kotamraju Bala Padmaja and 3 Others v. the State of A.P. and Another

Telangana HC18 Feb 2016CRLP/1997/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge dismissed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. The court declined to interfere with investigation into alleged document forgery arising from a family property dispute, directing the police to complete inquiry without arresting the petitioners provided they cooperate.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings denied; investigation to be completed without arresting petitioners.

Kotamraju Bala Padmaja and 3 Others Vs the State of A.P… — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1997 OF 2016

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

1. This petition is filed by the petitioners-A3 to A6 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.2 of 2016 on the file of Pattabhipuram Police Station, Guntur District, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, 120-B r/w 506 IPC.

¶4

2. Heard and perused the material available on record.

¶5

3. From the material on record, it is obvious that the petitioners and the 2^nd respondent are the cousins by courtesy. The present complaint has arisen out of the family disputes between the 2^nd respondent and the petitioners with regard to the property of their paternal uncle, who died issueless. The petitioners and the 2^nd respondent are claiming to be legal heirs of their paternal uncle. It is alleged by the 2^nd respondent that the petitioners with the help of A1 and A2 created forged will to defeat his rights, whereas it is the case of the petitioners that civil suits are pending between the parties and that they have not forged any documents.

¶6

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the investigation in the above crime.

¶7

5. At this stage, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigating agency and produce all the documents, which are necessary for the purpose of investigation and that the petitioners are ready to give their specimen signatures as well as the hand writings, if they are necessary during the course of investigation. He further submitted that in view of the pendency of the above crime, the petitioners apprehend arrest.

¶8

6. In view of the above submission, the 1^st respondent-police are directed to complete the investigation without arresting the petitioners. The petitioners are directed to appear before the 1^st respondent-police as and when required, and co-operate with the investigating agency as stated by their Counsel before this Court. In case of failure on the part of the petitioners to co-operate with the investigating agency, the 1^st respondent-police are at liberty to file an application before this Court to recall this order.

¶9

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶10

______________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶11

Date : 18.2.2016 Nn

¶12

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶13

CRIMINAL PETITION No.1997 OF 2016

¶14

DATED 18.2.2016

¶15

Kotamraju Bala Padmaja and 3 Others v. the State of A.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotamraju Bala Padmaja and 3 Others v. the State of A.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Satyanarayana, Vs K.Mahaboob Khan

M/s Frontline Advertisers, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

V.Bheemaiah Vs The State of Telangana.,rep.,Pp

Smt. Gurre Nagarathnam Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

J.Kishan Vs The State of Telangana

S. Krishna Mohan Rao Vs the State of Telangana and Another