Dismissed

puttapaka Srinivas v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Jul 2021CRLP/4109/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana dismissed a criminal petition filed under Sections 492 and 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash an FIR alleging cheating. The court held the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case for quashing and the investigation should proceed.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Petition No. 4109 of 2021 to quash FIR No. 261 of 2021 was dismissed, allowing the investigation to continue.

puttapaka Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH GOURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENT' ON;'

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOUR.ABLE SRI JUSTICE K,LAKSHMAN CRIMINA LPETITIO NNO: 4109 oF 2021

¶5

Between:

¶6

EiiTif;gi:'X;'rfir:€%il?te%?ffig:l,roi.r,,",&^{occRearEstate} Business, r/o

¶7

... PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶8

AND

¶9

1 The State of Telanoana. through_S.H.O., Jubilee Hills " police ' Station, Hyderabad rep. By Pubtic^pros-ecut6r, HigE Corrt, Fii;;;j]

¶10

2 Venna Satyanarayana Rao.-S/o Late V.Hanumantha Rao, aged maior, occ. Business, r/o^ptot No isalr, ni,i,l r,16'. ii,'T;tiH H,il.,"ivo."Eulo.

¶11

...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT

¶12

Petition under Section 492 0f cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to call for the records rerating to the F.r.R.No. 261 of 202.r on the fire of the Jubiree Hills Police Station, Hyderabad, and quash the proceedings thereon, and to grant such other rerief or reriefs as this Hon'bre court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶13

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶14

Petition under Section 4g2 of cr.p .c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition,the High court may be preased to grant stay of all further proceedings incruding the arrest of the petitioner rn F.r.R.No. 261 o'f 2021 on the fire of the Jubiree Hiils porice station, Hyderabad, pending disposal of the Criminal petition.

¶15

This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri DoKKA MOHAN RAo 'Advocate for the petitioner and the pubric prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent No'1 and of Sri r. pradyumn Kumar Reddy senior counser representing Sri T. Anirudh Reddy Advocate for the Respondent No.2

¶16

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶17

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN}

¶18

CRIMINAL PETITION^{No.41090F 2021}

¶19

ORDER:

¶20

This Criminal Petition^{is frled to quashthe F'l'R'No'261 of} 2021 pending on the^{fiie of JubileeHills PoliceStation,Hyderabad'} The petitioner herein^{is the sole accusedin the abovesaid crime'} The offences alleged^{against him are underSections406' 42O,468} and 471 IPC.

¶21

Heard Sri D.Mohan^{Rao, learned counselfor the petitioner,} Sri T. Pradyumn Kumar^{Reddy,learnedSenior Counsel} representing Sri T.Anirudh^{Reddy,learned counselfor the second} respondent, and the learned^{Public Prosecutor.}

¶22

Perused the record.

¶23

The allegations levelled^{against the petitioner hereinare that} he has made the second^{respondent to believethat he is the owner} of Plot Nos.4, 5. 6^{and' 7 in Block No.69 of LahariGreen Park} Layout situated in^{Sy.Nos.459lP,460lPart,461} lPart,^462lPart and 465lPart of Kondakal^{ViliageandGrampanchayat,} Shankarpally Mandal,^{Ranga Reddy District' The second} respondent has^{paid an amount of Rs'5,05,00,000/- to the} petitioner herein. The^{petitioner hereindid not furnishcopiesof} documents including^{copiesof agreements of sale on which the} petitioner is claiming right^{over the propert-v to the second} respondent. Thus, the^{petitioner hereinhas deceivedthe second} respondent and obtained^{a huge amountof Rs'5,05'00,000/- '}

¶24

Sri D.Mohan Rao,^{Iearned counsel for the petitioner,would} subm[ that the^{disputesbetween the petitioner rrnd the second}

¶25

respondent are civil^{in nq'ture and it is a counter-blastcase to} Crime No.256 of^2021.

¶26

Learned Public Prosecutor^{has producedthe statements of} the witnesses recorded^{under Section 16 i Cr.P'C'}

¶27

Learned counsel for^{the petitioner has also producedtwo} agreements of sale'^{A perusal of the samewould reveal that one} Smt.Kancherla^{Ramana, W/o.Late'K'Pul1aiahChowdhary, is the} owner of the^{land and Sri NallaBhchiReddy, S/o' Nalla} Ramchandra Reddy,^{has signed the said agreements of sale on} behalf of Smt.Kancherla^{Ramana claimingthat he is the agreement} holder. In the^{said agreementsof sale there is a mention as to on} what basis the^{petitionerhas signed the said agreements'}

¶28

According to this^{Court, Sri Na1laBuchi Reddyhas no power} to sign the agreements^{claiming to be the agreementholder of} Smt. Kancherla^{Ramana'He has no title over the said property' It} is reievant to^{note that in her statement recorded underSection} 161 Cr.P.C., Smt.^{Kancherla Ramanahas stated that she has sold} Plot Nos.4,5,6^{and 7 admeasuring 13,953'33squareyards in} Sy.Nos.459/Part,^{460lPart,46llPart, 462lPart artd 465lPart} situated at Kondakal^{Village, Shankarpally Mandal,to Sri Nalla} Rajasekhar Reddy,^{S/o. Buchi Red'dyuide Document No'2841 of} 2O2l daled.^{lg .O4.2O21 .She never sold the said land to the} petitioner herein'

¶29

In the light of the^above ,^pima facie,^{thete are serious} allegations against^{the petitioner herein'}

¶30

Learned Public^{Prosecutor,on instructions,would submit} that the^{petitioner has involvedin eleven cases and someof the}

¶31

¶32

cases were ended in compromise before the Lok Adalat. Thus, according to him, the petitioner is a habitual offender.

¶33

Considering the above said facts, this Court is not inclined to interdict the investigation which is at the threshold and quash the proceedings in Crime No.261 of 2O2l pending on the fiie of Jubilee Hills Police Station, Hyderabad. The petitioner miserably failed to make out any case to quash the proceedings by this Court by invoking the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.p.C. This Criminal Petition is 1iab1e to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed.

¶34

Miscellane ous Petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal

¶35

Petition shall also stand dismissed.

//TRUE COPY//

AssrsriR/it"ffi ,,

1 2 3^{.ils5i{#fl i;i;S#i"J,i"{ffi3:.,]li61x9,:X31?,fl,.)fl} ?js,ly,.xrderabad ;-,1rt::"t".f ?SLPiosecuto''nighc;;dii)i".'stn,.orrerangana

¶40

One CC to SRI. DOKKA'MOJJA\ s +AO.^{Advocare[opUC]} 6. ,uff.gtJ|r!"t^{r' AnirudhReddv. Advocat"ropUCl'"' "'}

HIGH COURT

KLJ

DATED:1610712021

ORDER

GRLP.No.4109 of 2021

.dS*-
c,a
v
c
,r9rH *

¶47

DISMISSING THE CRL.PETITION.

puttapaka Srinivas v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

puttapaka Srinivas v. The State of Telangana

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

E. Navin Kumar Vs State of Telangana

Mr. Thota Pavan Vs Department of Home

Mohammed Sameed Ali Vs The State of Telangana

Aleem MD Vs The State of Telangana

P. Prasanth , Perupally Prasanth Vs P.Ramyasri

Prof.Gaddam Laxman Vs The State of Telangana and another