Dismissed

Mir Qamar Hassan Razvi v. The State of Telangana and Another

Telangana HC16 Apr 2021CRLP/630/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought to quash Crime No.811 of 2020 alleging trespass, mischief and intimidation over land in Survey No.355/1, Malkajgiri, and a writ petition sought to restrain police from interfering in the civil dispute. Finding specific allegations, pending investigation and suppression of material facts, the court refused to quash the crime and dismissed all the pet

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; petitioners directed to pay costs of Rs.10,000 each to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association within two weeks.

Mir Qamar Hassan Razvi Vs The State of Telangana and… — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR AT HYDTJREA:IITE^{OF TELANGANA}

¶2

Fll?tY rHE S|XTEENTH DAY oF APR|L TWO THOUSAND AND TWENiY ONI''' PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN CRIMI NAL P ETITIO N Nos 630 661 a nd Crl .P. N o.2012 ot2021 and W,P . No. 4780 ot 2021

¶4

Crl.P .N o. 630 of 2012

¶5

Between:

¶6

Mir Qamar Hassan Razvi S/o_ Late I,4 ir Mohd Hassan. Aged about 58 years, Occ Business, R/o. 30_261, ord s;irsud; r/;i,,r;i,iii, nii's"r. Reddy District, r.s.

¶7

..PETITTONERyACCUSED No.1

¶8

AND

¶9

The State of Telangana , Rep. by its public prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.

¶10

Z. [. ntaV Kumar Raju, S/o. K. Thirupathi Raju, Aged about 43 years, Occ.: Business, R/o. Vilta No. 15, Srivali UpprOipattallirupathi Road.

¶11

...RESPONDENTS/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶12

Petition under section 4g2 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the l/emorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to quash the proceedings against the petitroner in crime No. No. 811r2o2o registered by the Police Malkajgiri, Rachakonda for the offences u/s. 447, 427 , 506 lpc., in the interest of justice .

¶13

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶14

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 grant stay of all further proceedings including arrest and appearance of the petitioner crime No. No. 811/2020 registered by the police Malkajgiri, Rachakonda for the offences uls. 447, 427, 506 lPC., pending disposal of the main criminal petition.

¶15

This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the [/emorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri I,4. RATHAN SINGH ,Advocate for the Petitioner and the^public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and Sri C. NARESH REDDy, ADVOCATE for the Respondent No.2

¶16

¶17

RIM INAL PETI^{TIONNO : 661OF2021}

¶18

Between:

¶19

r,4ohammed^{SirajuddinAhme3} 8.y"!3I[:1 "f,]'iri'-";,U3l$T;,i"ffi'l"fiiittl Ahmed,^Agedabout .40^Yel Lalaguda,^{Hyderabao'I >'}

¶20

"'PETITIONER/ACCUSED^No'2

¶21

AND

¶22

The State^{of Telangana,Rep by its Public Prosecutor' High Court at} Hyderabad.

¶23

z. K. Aiav^{Kumar Raju, S/o K ThirupathiR.aju' Aged about 43-Years'} occ. Eiusines.,^{nyo].' rTiiiJ Ni" i 5, s;;;ri Vitta,Llppudipatta, riru pathi} Road. "^{RESPoNDENT/coMPLAINANT}

¶24

PetitionunderSection4B2ofCr.P.Cprayingthatinthecircumstances statedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition'theHighCourtmay be^pleased to^{quash the proceedings againstthe Petitionerin CrimeNo'} Blll2o2oregisteredbythePolicetr/alkajgiri,Rachakondafortheoffencesu/s. 447 , 427,500^{lPC., in the interest of justice'}

¶25

l.A. NO: 1 OF²⁰²¹

¶26

Petition under section^{482 of cr.P.cpraying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Grounds of criminalPetition,the Highcourt may} be pleased to dispense^{with the filing of the certified copy of FIR No. 81112020} registered by the Police^{Malkajgiri, Rachakonda in the interest of justice}

¶27

A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶28

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^{praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition,the HighCourt may} be pleased to grant stay of all further^proceedings including arrest^and appearance of the Petitioner in Crime No.^811/2020 registered^{by the Police} ti/alkajgiri, Rachakonda for the offences uls,447,427,506 lPC.,^pending disposal of the main criminal^petition.

¶29

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the l/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri tVl. RATHAN SINGH, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and Sri C. Naresh Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No.2

¶30

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2012 OF 2021

¶31

' Betvveen:

¶32

IVir Qamar Hasan Razvi, S/o Late l\rlir. lvohammed Husain Aged About 60 year, Occ. Busrness R/o 30-261 , old Safilguda, tr,4alkajgiri, trzledchal^{"Ol"trict - -' - "-'}

¶33

2 Mohammed sirajuddin _ Ahmed @ Ivrohammed parveez, S/o lVlohammed Basheeruddin Ahmed, occ. Business Aged About 44 year, R/o 12-1J 510/6 Shanthi Nagar Lalapet Secunderabad, Lal-aguda Hyderabad

¶34

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 & 2

¶35

AND

¶36

1 The state of relangana ..represented by public prosecutor Having its office at Honorable High court Build ing.

¶37

2 5,.,Ajgy^{Ky1gr, S/o K} -Thirylcathi^{Raju ,Occ-Business, Aged About 41 years,R/o} Villa No. 15 Sri Vari Villas, Pudipattata- Village Near SV2oo park

¶38

..RESPONDENT Nos. 1&2

¶39

Petition under section 482 o'( cr.P .c praying that in the circumstances stated in the lt/emorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash FIR No. 811 of 2020, registered with station house officer of p.s Malkajgiri dt.21-12-2020, registered for the offence alleged under the Head of punishable 465, 467' 468,471,420,447,427 and 506 of lpc r/w Sec.34 of lpc arising from the information of Respondent No. 2 .

¶40

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021

¶41

Petition under Section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvemorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased to Dispense, with filling of certified copy of F.l.R registered with station House officer of P.s Malkajgiri, Dated 2111212020, registered for the offence alleged Under the Head of Punishable, 447, 427 and s06 of l.P.c R/w section 34 of l.pc along with Memo Dated 1210212021 465. 467, 468, 471, 420, 447, 427 and 506 of t.p,C R/w section 34 of l.P.c, since thrs Petitioner/ accused, having threat of arrest and having Filed c.A could not able to avail, srnce trial court had not issued F.l.R till yet, though C.A is filed.

¶42

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2021

¶43

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the I/emorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition,the High court may be pleased to stay all the proceedings, including the arrest of^{petitioner/Accused} No. 1 and 2, in FIR No. 811 of 2020, registered with station house officer of p.s Malkajgti dt. 21-122020, registered for the offence alleged under the Head of punishable 465, 467, 468, 471, 420, 447, 427 and 506 of IPC r/w sec. 34 of IPC arising from the information of Respondent No.2.

¶44

", This Petition coming on for^{hearing,uponperusing the [,4emorandum of} ' Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri N/. RATHAN sINGH ,Advocate for^{the Petitionerand the PublicProsecutoron behalf of the} Respondent No.1 and of sri c.^{Naresh Reddy Advocate for the Respondent No. 2}

¶45

WRIT PETITION NO: 4780^{OF 2021}

¶46

Between:

¶47

Mir Qamar Hasan Razvi, s/o^{Late lt/ir. It/ohammed HusainAged About 60 Year, Occ} Business R/o 30-261, old Safilguda,^{Malkajgiri, lvledchal District.}

¶48

...PETITIONER

¶49

AND

¶50

State of Telangana, rep by^{its Principle Secretary, Home Department' BRKR} Bhavan, Hyderabad.

¶51

The Additional Director General^{of PoliceClD, Telanganastate.}

¶52

The Commissioner of Police,^{Rachakonda Commissionarte,Hyderabad.}

¶53

The Deputy Commissioner of^{Police, Rachakonda Commissionarate Presiding at} Naredmet, Hyderabad District.

¶54

The Station House Officer, lVlalkajgiri^{PoliceStation, Hyderabad.}

¶55

K. Ajay Kumar, Sio^K. Thirupathi^{Raju AgedAbout 41 Year,R/o Villa No. 15 Sri} Vari-Villas, Pudipattala- Village Near^{SV Zoo Park, Thirupathi, ChittoorDistrict.}

¶56

..RESPONDENTS No. 1 to 6

¶57

Petition under Article 226 of the^Constitution of^{lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to} issue a writ order or direction,^{moreparticularly one in the nature of writ of} mandamus, direct invoke its extra ordinary^{Jurisdictionby resorting to article 226 of} constitution of lndia by directing Respondent^{No.4 and 5, not to interferein to Civil} issues, direct them not to disturb the^{petitioner's Possession over Property that is 3} acres of land in Survey No. 355/1 in^{Block No.42, Falling in GayathirNagar,} tr/alkajgiri- IVedhcal District.

¶58

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶59

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to direct Respondent No.4 to act on the^petitioner's information addressed to it and acknowledged by it on 2210112021 , 2710112021 in accordance of law, under the supervision of Respondent No.3, pending disposal of the writ petition,

¶60

lA NO: 2 OF 2021

¶61

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Courl may be pleased to direct Respondent No.4 to take over investigation in crlme No, 811 oI 2020 registered with

¶62

¶63

¶64

Respondent No.5 since the

¶65

and to do investisation ,,,,;:'"tt':ff;i11,11i.":::r":#l:T,:1ff?"":,1"J:X.: pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶66

IANo:3 oF2021

¶67

petition under Sec arr dav r r ed n support'::J,;:'ffff:il',ll1 :j:: T:r r':::::::,:j ;,1: Respondent No.4 and 5, not to enter in to Civil petitioner and respondent No.6 in respect ", ro""Jl:::t;;t:'Ti:,i""I"::Ji; survey No 355/1 in Block No.42, Faring in Gayathir Nagar, rvarkajgiri- Medhcar District covered by 0 5 No 1669 0'f 2016, o.s. No. 330 0f 20.16, pending for adjudication on the file of Honorable XVI Additionat Honorabte Sub court presidins at Markajsiri pendins ."r lx;T:il:1r" ,r,

¶68

Counsel for the petitioner: M/s. A. L. BHARADWAJTNT

¶69

Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 5: AGp FOR HOME

¶70

Counsel forthe Respondent No.6: SRI C. NARESH REDDY

¶71

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶72

¶73

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN}

¶74

CRIMINAL PDTITION^{Nos 63o. 661 &2U^L2 0F 202L} AND W.P.No. 47aO OF^202L

¶75

coMMON ORDER:

¶76

Heard Sri M. Rathan^{Singh,learned counselfor} petitioners, Sri C. Naresh^{Reddy, learned counselfor} second. respondent^{and learned PtrblicProsecutorarid} learned Assistant^{Government Pleader for Home'}

¶77

Cr1.P.No.63O of 2021^{is filed under Section482} Cr.P.C. to quash the^{proceedings in crime No'811of2O2O} pending on the file of^{Police Station Malkajgiri' The} petitioner herein is A-1.^{The olfences alleged against him} are under Sections^{447, 427 and 506 IPC'}

¶78

Cr1.P.No.66 I of 2O2l^{is filed to quash the very same} proceedings in Crime^{No.811 of 2O2O and petitioner} herein is A-2 in the^{said crime.}

¶79

CrI.P.No.2O12 of^{2O2l isfiled toquash the} proceedings in the very^{salne Crime No'811 of 2O2O'} Petitioners herein^{are A-1 and A-2 in the said crime'}

¶80

W.P.No.478O^{of 2021 is filed seeking direction to} respondent Nos.^{4 and 5 not to interfere in civil disputes} and direct them^{not to disturb the petitioners'possession} over the property^{i.e. Ac.O3-00guntas of land in survey}

¶81

CRLP 6J0 2021 and batch

¶82

No.355/ 1 1n Block No.42, faTling^{inGayathriNagar,} Malkajgiri Medchal District.^{Petitioner herein is A- 1 in} Crime No.811 of^2O2O.

¶83

According to second respondent/defacto complainant, the allegations^{against A- 1 and A-2 in crime} No.811 of 2O2O are^{that the second respondent is the} absolute owner and^{possessor of land situated in survey} No.355/1, Block^{No.42, admeasuring 5451'53 square} yards, 3449.72 squa-re^{yards and 6943'09square yards} situated in Gayathri^{Nagar, Malkajgiri'He has acquired} the said land under^{registereddocuments bearingNos'} 9447 12012, 944812012^{and944912012,dated} 31.07.2012. He^{has constructed compound wall} encircling the^{said land, fixed an iron gate and locked the} said premises.^{He is doing real estate business and he is} looking a-fter^{the prestigiousproject at Tirupati and as} such he is^{spending most of his time away from} Hyderabad.

¶84

On 06. I2.2O2O^{he went to the said properqyand} found that^{A-1 inconnivancewith A-2 and others'} resident of^{Moula-li with the assistance of antisocial} elements armed^{with weaponswere presentat the site} with an evil^{eye, broke open the lock and illegally} trespassed^{into the said land' Thus, they have tried to}

¶85

KL.J CRLP 630 2021 and batch

¶86

¶87

¶88

occupy the land belongs to the second respondent and A- 1 claiming himself as owner based on false and fabricated documents. They have assaulted and threatened the second respondent with dire consequences.

¶89

On receipt of said complaint from the second respondent, police have registered a case in Crime No.81 1 of 2O2O for the aforesaid offences against A_ 1 and A-2.

¶90

According to Sri M. Rathan Singh, learned counsel, would submit that A- 1 and A-2 gave complaints against Circle Inspector of Police, Malkajgiri and other police officials. They bore grudge against A-1 and A_2 and therefore, they have implicated them in a false case. In fact, father of A- 1 and eleven others are legal owners and possessors of land admeasuring Ac.14.01 guntas in survey No.355/1 of Malkajgiri Viliage and Manda_l and that a-11 other co-owners of said land for the purpose of convenience, effective management of said land and to represent all the owners in an-y proceedings, executed the Genera-l Power of Attorney (G.p.A.) dated 07.01.1969 and subsequently on 17.05.1969 which were duly registered as Document No.2 of 1969 and Document No.23 of 1969. Originally after the death of father of A,1, joint owners of / /

¶91

¶92

(IRLP 610 2021 and brtch

¶93

¶94

said land have executed the G.P.A. dated 12.02.1995 appointing A-1 as their G.P.A holder to manage and to do all the 1ega1 acts in relation to said property admeasuring Ac.i4-01 guntas. By virtue of said G.P.A., A-1 has been looking a-fter the affairs of the said property, which is continued to be in possession of A-1 as on date being legal heir. Mir Mohd Hasan, father of A-1 is joint owner and possessor of said 1and. According to A-1, second respondent/defacto complainant conspired with his associates to knock away the said property, created and fabricated the documents, impersonating the owners and forging their signatures. There are contradictions in the versions of second respondent. According to him, allegations leveled against A-1 and A-2 are civil in nature. Proceedings vide O.S.No.15 of 2O2l are pending on the said a-llegations. According to him A-1 artd A-2 are in possession of the said property. In fact, the second respondent/defacto complainant is trying to knock away the said property.

¶95

i0. He would further submit that on the complaint lodged by A-1, the Police, LB Nagar has registered a case in Cr.No.584 of 2Ol4 against the second respondent for the offences under Sections 419, 465, 467, 468, 477 and 506 IPC. After completion of investigation, they have filed

¶96

KL,J CRLP 630 2021 and batch

¶97

¶98

final report against the second respondent and another for the aforesaid offences. The same was taken on fi1e. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that there is delay 1n lodging the complaint. The second respondent is trying to criminalize lhe civil proceedings to knock away the said property belongs to A1 and others. With the said submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners sought to quash the proceedings in crime No.811 of 2O2O against A.1 and A-2 and a,lso a direction to Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Commissionerate and Station House Officer, Malkajgiri Police Station not to interfere in civil dispute.

¶99

Sri C. Naresh Reddy, learned counsel appearing for second respondent submit that A- t herein has suppressed the fact of filing earlier criminal petitions i.e. Cr1.P.No.630 of 2021 and 661of 2021 ir-r Cr1.P.No.2Ol2 of 2021 and WP.No,478O of 2021. According to him, Crl.P.No.2O12 of 2021 was filed by A-1 and A-2 to quash the proceedings in Crime No.811 of 2O2O during the pendency of Crl.P. Nos. 630 of 2021 and 661 of 2021 filed by A- 1 and A-2 respectively seeking to quash the izery same F.I.R. in crime No.B11 of 2O2O. Thus, there is ciear suppression of fact. According to him, A- t has

¶100

¶101

¶102

CRLP 630 2021 and batch

¶103

¶104

suppressed the said fact in WP.No.47BO of 2021. He would further submit that anticipatory bail application filed by petitioners was also dismissed. Even then, they filed the present applications seeking to stay a_11 further proceedings in crime No.81 1 of 2O2O.

¶105

According to him, there are speciiic allegations against both A- 1 and A-2 and they have criminally trespassed into land belonging to second respondent, broke open the lock and trespassed into the said land along with antisocial elements armed with weapons ald they have assaulted on the second respondent and threatened him lvith dire consequences. Thus, there are spe,:ific allegations against A-1 and A-2. There are severa1 other factua,l aspects to be investigated into by the Investigating Officer including the delay in lodging complaint. A-1 and A-2 herein instead of cooperating with the Investigating Officer filed the present appiication seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.811 of 1n 2O2O. According to him, second respondent-A-l C.C.No.740 of 2015 (arising out of Crime No.584 of 20141 was discharged by the Court below vide order dated 29.1.O.2015 in Cr1.P.No.\228 of 2015. In C.C.No.740 of 2015, A-2 was also acquitted by the Court below. With the said submissions, learned counsel appearing for

¶106

.KL,J

¶107

CRLP 630 2021 and batch

¶108

¶109

¶110

respondent No.2 sought to dismiss al1 the three criminal petitions and aiso WP.No.47BO ol 2027.

¶111

Learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits that A- 1 and A-2 intentionally suppressed severaj. material facts including dismissa-l of anticipatory bail application vide Cri.P.No.2008 of 2021 filed by them in crime No.81 I of 2020 and also pendency of Cr1.P.Nos.630 of 2021 and Cr1.P.No.661 of 2027 and Crl.P.No.2Ol2 of 2O2l and WP.No.478O of 2O2l . There are civil cases pending against A-1 and three cases against A-2. The Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of four witnesses and investigation is pending. There are factua-1 aspects to be investigated by the Investigating Officer. There are specific allegations against both accused and they have to be investigated by the Investigating Officer during the corlrse of investigation. With the said submissions, learned Pubiic Prosecutor sought to dismiss all the four cases.

¶112

In view of the rival submissions, it is relevant to note that there are disputes between A- 1 and A-2 and second respondent with regard to land in survey No.355/ 1 situated at Gayatrinagar, Malkajgiri. Second respondent is claiming that he is the owner of said land

¶113

¶114

¶115

CRLP 630 2021 and batch

¶116

¶117

¶118

and furnished registered documents mentioned supra. A- 1 is also claiming that he is joint owner and possessor of said land along lr,ith others. He acquired the said land by way of inheritance. He is also claiming that he is having three G.P.As mentioned supra and other co-olvners have executed said G.P.As in his favour for the purpose of managing said property and aLso to protect the said property from il1ega1 encroachments. The suit vide O.S.No.51 of 2021 flled by M/s.Helium Traders Private Limited against second respondent and other is also pending and A- 1 got impleaded in the said suit. The earlier crime i.e. Crime No.554 of 20i5 ended in acquittal and also second respondent was a-lso discharged. On the complaint lodged by one Ahmed Basha, a case 1n crlme No.1048 of 2Ol4 r,vas registered against A-1 for the offences under Sections 147, 427, 424, l2O-B IPC and Section 5 of Land Grabbing Act and Section 54^{(A) Wakf} Act. The suit in O.S.No.330 of 20 16 filed by^second respondent against A- 1 for Perpetual Injunction is^aLso pending. Another suit in O.S.No.1669 of 2016 filed by Kumar Agarwal against A- 1 and A-2 and others^{is a-lso} pending. Learned counsel for the second respondent by referring to the proceedings dated 18.01.202 1 issued^by Sub-Divisionai Magistrate and Revenue^Divisional

¶119

¶120

KL,J CRLP 630_2021 and batch

¶121

¶122

¶123

Officer, Malkajgiri Division, Medchal-Ma-lkaj giri District, would submit that in the said proceedings, there is a specific reference that the sale deeds executed by A_ 1 are proved to be executed by al incompetent person i.e. Mir Qamar Hasan Razvi (A-1) and he does not have any right to execute the same. He is only one of the five 1ega1 heirs of Mohammed Hassan, who is one among other 11 owners of the property that too, when they have sold in favour of Ayub Ali and Akula Manju. Further, GpA on the basis of which, he has executed sale deeds is invalid for the reason that several executants have clied before execution of the sale deeds. Further A_ t himself gave statement before the income tax officia.ls stating that he has never executed registered sale deeds, agreements of sale in respect of land and that he has no power to execute ald register sale deeds as the GpA holder.

¶124

Learned counsel for the second respondent referring to the proceedings dated 3O.OT.2Ol2 issued by Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA), would submit that HMDA has issued land use information in favour of the second respondent stating that the said lald in survey No.355 is in residential zone and aflected 30 meters wide proposed road and another side affected 30 meters wide road. Learned counsei for

¶125

CRLP 630 2021 and batc

¶126

¶127

¶128

A-1 and A-2 have also filed severa_l agreements/GpAs, representations etc., Thus, there are several factual aspects to be investigated into by the Investigating Officer including the aspect of delay in lodging the complaint by the second respondent. The Honble Apex Court time and again held that the aspects of limitation and jurisdiction have to be investigated into by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and on the said grounds, F.I.R. cannot be quashed. According to learned Public Prosecutor, the Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of four witnesses and the investigation is pending. The anticipatory bail application vide Crl.P.No.2008l2021 filed by the petitioners was dismissed.

¶129

It is relevant to note that A-1 filed petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. vide Crl.P.No.630 of 202 1 seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.811 of 2O2O and A-2 fiied similar petition to quash the very same crime vide Cr1.P.No.661 of 2021. In both the petitions, no interim orders were passed by this Court. During the pendency of said crimina-l petitions, both A- 1 arrd A-2 have filed crimina-l petition No.20 12 of 2021 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the very same F.I.R. in Crime No.811 of 2O2O pending on the file of Malakjgiri Poiice

¶130

KL.J CRLP 630 2021 and batch

¶131

¶132

¶133

Station. It is relevant to note that in Crl.p.No.2012 of 2021, they have mentioned filing of Crl.p.No.630 of 2O2l and that this Court orally instructed to avail bail, since at the inception of F.I.R., offence was set for bailabie offence, but now such crime has been altered with nonbailable offence and even grounds raised in the crimina_l petition vary from earlier grounds. Thus, they have not mentioned about pendency of Crl.p.No.66l of 2021.

¶134

It is a-lso relevant to note that in Wp.No.47g0 of 2021, both A-1 and A-2 have not even mentioned about pendency of the above said criminal petitions i.e., Cr1.P.Nos.630 and 66 1 of 2027. There is suppression of fact by A-1 and A-2. As stated above, there are severa,l factual aspects to be investigated into by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation. It is also relevant to note that initially F.I.R.No.g1 I of 2O2O was registered for the offence under Sections 442, 427 and 506 IPC. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer has filed alteration memo on lO.O2.2O2l by adding sections 465, 467 , 478, 42O, 427 to the existing provisions of law. Several grounds raised by parties are factua,l aspects and they are to be investigated into by the Investigating Officer. Leertted counsel for petitioners, referring to the complaints dated 16.01.2021, 21..O1.2O2t, 22.O1.2021

¶135

¶136

CRLP 630_2021 and batch

¶137

¶138

aj]d 26.01.202 1 submitted by AJ., would submit ttrat police have bore grudge against A1 in view of the complaints lodged by him against the oflicials of police. Therefore, they have implicated A_1 and 42 in the present case. A perusal of the complaints would reveal that there is nothing replica to the contentions of first petitioner wittr regard to his claim over the above said property. He has made allegations against the second respondent and made certain ba,ld a-ilegations against police officials.

¶139

It is a,lso relevant to note that A_1 and A_2 have filed petition under Section 43g Cr.p.C. seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No.811 of 2O2O vide Crt.Mp.No.37 of 2O2l and XVI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad dismissed the said application vide order dated 02.03 .2021 on the ground that investigation is pending and there are serious allegations of forgery, cheating and dishonesty.

¶140

According to learned public prosecutor and a_lso learned counsel appearing for the second respondent, A-1 has involved in seven cases and A-2 has involved in three cases of similar nature. The details of the same are specifically mentioned in the counter filed bv second

¶141

¶142

KL.J CRLP 630 2021 and batch

¶143

¶144

respondent. As per the said counter, the details of said

¶145

crimes are as follows:-

¶146

Crime No.321 of 2003 (P.S.Malkajgiri) 2. Crime No.215 of 2071 of P,S.Abids. 3. Crime No.102 of 2Ol2 P.S.Malkajgiri 4. Crime No.231 of 2012 of P.S.Ma1kajgiri

¶147

Crime No.686 of 2OL4 of P.S.Malkajgiri. 6. Crime No.836 of 2074 of P.S.Matkajgiri. 7. Crime No.1048 of 2014 of P.S.punjagutta.

¶148

A perusa_l of the proceedings in Lr.No.L/12012017, dated \8.0t.2021 issued by SubDivisional Magistrate and Revenue Divisional Officer, Malkajgiri Division, Medchal Malkajgiri District, would reveal that A- t has executed some documents in favour of third parties. Some of the purchasers have constructed their houses and that house numbers proved to be fictitious and non-existent as per the certifi,:ate issued by G.H.M.C. The SaIe deeds are proved to be executed by incompetent person eamar Hassan Razvi, A-1 herein. He does not have any right to execute the sarne. He is only one of the five legal heirs of Mohd.Hassan, who is one of eleven owners of the property, that too when they have sold property in favour of Ayub Ali and Akula Manju. The sa,ie deeds are inva_1id for the reason that several executants have died before execution of sa_le deeds. A- t himself gave statement before thg income tax officia-ls stating that he has never

¶149

x-_

¶150

CRLP 630 2021 and batch

¶151

l,l

¶152

execute and register sa_le deeds or agreements of sa_le deed in respect of said land. Further he had no power to execute registered sale deeds as power of Attorney Holder. The above stated facts would reveal that A_1 and A-2 have conveniently suppressed the fact of pending of Criminai Petition No.661 of 2O2l in Crl.p.No.2Ol2 of 2O2l . They have aiso suppressed the factum of dismissal of anticipatory bail by this Court.

¶153

In WP.No.4O87 of 2021., the petitioners are seeking a direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 i.e. police officials not to interfere in any civil disputes claiming that they are in possession of the property. Thus, there is clear suppression of fact of A- 1 and A-2 herein.

¶154

As stated above, the matter is at the crime stage. Investigating Officer has recorded the statements of four witnesses. Investigation is pending. Admittedly, severa-l factual aspects have to be investigated into by the Investigating Olficer during the course of investigation. The Honble Apex Court in Sau.Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar v. the State of Maharashtral categorically held as under:

¶155

" Quashing the criminal proceedings is ca-lled for only in a case where the complaint does not disclose any offence, or is frivolous, I 2otq t+ scc :so

¶156

-.-.!#:

¶157

KL,J CRLP 630 2021 and batch

¶158

¶159

vexatious, or oppressive. If the allegations set^{out in the complaintdo not} conslitute the offence of which cognizance^{has been taken by the} Magistrate, it is open to the High^{Courtto quash the safle It is not} necessary that a meticulous ana.lysis of the^{case should be donebefore} the trial to find out whether the case^{would end in conviction or} acquittal. If it appears on a reading of the complaint^{and consideration of} the allegations therein, in the light of the statement^{made on oath that} the ingredients of the offence are disclosed,^{there wouldbe no} justihcation for the High Court to interfere. Defences that may be available, or facts/aspects which when established^{during the trial,may} lead to acquittal, are not grounds for^quashing the complaint at^the threshold. At that stage, the only^question relevant is^whetherthe averments in the complaint spell out the^{ingredients of a criminaloffence} or not. The correctness or otherwise of the said^{allegationshas to be} decrded only in the trial. At the initial stage of issualce^{of processit is} not open to the coufts to stifle the^{proceedings by enteringinto the} merits of the contentions made on behalf of the^{accused. Crimina-l} complarnts cannot be quashed only on lhe^{ground that the allegations} made therein appear to be of a civil nature. If the ingredients^{of the} offence alleged against the accused are^{primafacie made out in the} complaint, the criminal proceeding shall not be^{interdicted."}

¶160

In view of the law laid down by Hon'ble^Apex Court, as discussed supra,^pima facie, lhere are^specific allegations against both accused. The contents^of complaint, prima facie, would reveal that they^constitute a cognizable offence. There are^{severalfactuaiaspectsto} be investigated into by the Investigating Officer. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to^quash the proceedings in Crime No.811 of 2O2O. A-1 and A-2 failed to make out any ground or circumstance that warrants interference by this Court invoking its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. ,"

¶161

CRLP 6J0_2021 and batch l6

¶162

Accordingly, Crl.P.Nos.630, 66 1 and 2012 of 2O2l a,re dismissed.

¶163

As far as W.P.No.4780 of 2O2l is concerned, the petitioners tailed to establish t-hat police officials are interfering in civil disputes. Admittedly, the above said crime i.e. Crime No.811 of 2O2O is pending against A-1 and A-2. According to police, they are investigating into the said crime. A-1 involved in seven cases arrd A-2 involved in three cases. As discussed supra, they have suppressed filing of earlier petitions in Writ petition and Cr1.P.No.2012 of 2021. Their bonafi.des are highly doubtful apart from criminal altecedents. Therefore, they failed to make out any case for granting relief, as sought in WP.No.4780 of 2021. They have suppressed the material facts. Therefore, WP.No.4780 of 2021 is also liable to be dismissed and accordingly, the sa.me is dismissed.

¶164

As stated above, in view of the suppression of facts by both A-1 and A-2, they are directed to pay costs of Rs.1O,O0O/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association within two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, and file a receipt in proof of the same into the Registry.

¶165

f-''..

¶166

KL.J CRLP^{630 2021and batch}

¶167

¶168

/-&

¶169

In the^{event of their failure to pay the costs' the Registrar} (Judicial^{- I) is directedto take stePs in accordancewith} 1aw.

¶170

As a sequel,^{miscelianeous petitions'if any' pending}

¶171

in these^{petitions sha1l stand closed'}

A .'.?{''^N+?tHS''#

/iTRUE^COPY//

SECTION^OFFICER

lt'rn"^{Registrar (Judicial- l)' High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad'}

¶176

The^{XVll Additional Metropolitan Magistrate' Cyberabadat Malkaigiri'} 3. The^{Principle Secretary' State of Telangana' Home Department' BRKR Bhavan'} HYderabad'

¶177