The High Court dismissed a criminal petition seeking quashment of proceedings under Section 482 CrPC. The court found a strong prima facie case of cheating against the petitioner and other accused, noting pending investigation and absconding of some accused.
The petition seeking quashment of criminal proceedings was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8513 of 2017
ORDER:
In this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitionerA.1 seeks to quash the proceedings against him in Cr.No.10 of 2016 of Parigi Police Station, Vikarabad District, which was registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 506 read with 34 I.P.C.
The case of the defacto complainant is that A.2 and A.3 are daughter and son-in-law of A.1 and all of them have colluded and misrepresented the defacto complainant that A.3 is working in the Railway Board and if the complainant pays the amount, he would secure job. The complainant has deposited Rs.6,00,000/- in the bank account given by the accused. It appears that the complainant also gave two more lakhs. Ultimately, the accused have cheated the complainant by not securing any job or returning the amount. The investigation is reported to be pending.
Seeking quashment, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the complaint allegations are false and the petitioner-A.1 has nothing to do with the offence and even as per complaint allegations he has not received the amount and above all, he is a government employee and his arrest will adversely effect his
2
job. He thus, sought for quashment of the proceedings pending against him.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition stating that the investigation is pending and the accused are absconding and amount paid by the complainant is to be traced out.
As can be seen from the complaint allegations, there is a strong prima facie case against A.1 and other accused. The grievance of the complainant is that he paid Rs.8,00,000/- to the accused. PetitonerA.1 may not have directly received the amount but his complicity cannot be ruled out. The investigation is reported to be pending and therefore, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings.
Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO,J Dated 18-9-2017.
Dvs
3
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8513 of 2017
Dated 18-9-2017
Dvs
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings against the petitioner under Sections 420 and 506 IPC should be quashed given the prima facie case against him.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
A.1
A.2
A.3
U.DURGA PRASAD RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
