Partly allowed

M/S Esperanza Corporate (P) Ltd., and Anr., v. State of Telangana, Rep Pp and Anr.

Telangana HC1 Oct 2024CRLP/5044/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of criminal petitions under Section 482 CrPC challenging proceedings for cheating. Court quashed proceedings against accused No. 3, allowing her petition, while dismissing the petition against accused Nos. 1 and 2 due to outstanding trial issues, though dispensing with their attendance.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings against Accused No. 3 quashed. Criminal Petition No. 5044 of 2016 disposed of. Interim stay ordered for Accused Nos. 1 & 2 with conditions on attendance.

M/S Esperanza Corporate (P) Ltd., and Anr., Vs State… — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32es ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH^{COURT FORTHE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE^{FIRST DAYOF OCTOBER} TWO THOUSAND^{ANDTWENTYFOUR}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICEE.V. VENUGOPAL}

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITI^{ON NOS: 50 44&45 {6 0F 2016}

¶7

CRIMINAL P ETITIO^{N NO:5044 0F 2016}

¶8

Between:

¶9

[/l/s Esperanza^{Corporate (P) Ltd , A} -C-oT oanv incorPorated^underthe litdttto, cjpp^{IASQtrs, Road}

¶10

' dbino7fies Aii, 1956, situated at H'No -8-2-6 N6. i'0, aLniut"^{Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034}

¶11

Rep. by its^{Managing Director Mr' VasiReddyChandra Sheker}

¶12

Mr. Vasi^{Reddv Chandrasheker,-.s/o} -sri'^{u s3[iJ3;r0n:8,'l?,Hlr"'r:} - v6ird.-bcc Mlnaging Director, M/s E-sp-eranza Situated at H.No.^{8-2605;i"Jil]o'pi rn_s-ot' noad No'10'Banjara Hills'} Hyderabad^{- 500 034}

¶13

'..Petitioners^{/ Accused Nos' 1' 2}

¶14

AND

¶15

State of Telangana,^{Represented by thePubtic.Prosecutor'for the State of} Telanqana,^{Hish court ;i:",=,ii;;i';eli nvJeiin"o.torthe State of relangana} ; ;[i;, th;' Si;i;^{oiArioiira Fi]o'ein'atFtlvoeraoao' relang anastate}

¶16

The S.H.O,^{P.S.Banjara Hills' Hyderabad' TelanganaState}

¶17

The Asst. Commissioner^{of Police' W^CO'Team - V' CCS'Detective} " be"pirtnrenl, nyoeraoao, Telangana state

¶18

4 Smt. Javalakshrni^{AshalathaBipeta,-w/o^. B.} ^Chandra^{sheker, Aged 40 years} - 6;; PrJi;ii"lji o*.ei"?iiii "n.'r'rd )o-seri' Davanand Nasar' Malkaisiri' Hyderabad,^Telangana

¶19

...ResPondents^{/ CdmPlainant}

¶20

Petition under^{section 482 of cr'P.C. praying that in the circumstances} stated in the^{Memorandumof Groundsof CriminalPetition' the HighCourt may} be pleased^{to quash the impugned proceedings in CC No 16 ol 2016on the file} of the Xll Addl.^{Chief Metropolitan Magistrate' City Criminal Courtsat Nampally'} Hyderabad,^{while deciaring the same as wholly withoutjurisdiction}

¶21

¶22

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(CF LPMP. NO: 5817 OF 2015)

¶23

Petition under rlection 482 of cr,p.c. praying that rn the circumstances stated in the Memorarrdum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all lurther proceedings in c.c. No. 16 of 2016 on the file of the xll Addl. chief Metr:poritan Magistrate, city criminar courts at Nampaily, Hyderabad, including ihe personal appearance of the petitioners / the Accused Nos. 1 & 2 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'bre court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

¶24

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2016(CR LPMP. NO: 't6573 OF 2016)

¶25

Between:

¶26

Smt. Jayalakshrr i Ashalalha Bipeta, Wo-. B. Chandra Sheker, Aged 40 years, Occ Pre-Schoot r)wner, Rio. H.No. 20-99/i, OayininO Nagir, [/:t[ajg'iri,--'-' Hyderabad, Telarrgana

¶27

...Vacate Petitioner / Respondent No. 4 AND

¶28

[vl/s Esperanza Corporate (p) Ltd., A Company incorporated under the Comp_anies Acr. 1956, siruared'at H.i\o. a_i-a6tiiaio. dpiilAS oi;;, hd;; No. 10, Banjara t-tills. Hyderabad - SOO 034

¶29

Rep. by its Manalying Director Mr. Vasi Reddy Chandra Sheker

¶30

2 lvlr Vasi Reddy Chandra Sheker,,S/o. Sri. V. Nagarjuna, Aged about 35 years, Occ Mar aging Diiqqlor, uls. eiperaniitorporate" lpt-L-it"O situated at H.No. d-z:aosnsrco,'opp rnshG, no; I,i,;1d, e';,ilail'i_iils] Hyderabad - 500 134

¶31

...Respondents /^petitioners

¶32

State of Telangang. Represented by the public prosecutor, for the State of r erangana. Hrgh ()ourt of Judicature at Hyderabad for the state of relanoana

¶33

and for the Srate rrf Andhra pradesh, at Hyoerioio, rei;;s;;;si"i;'!q'|^'|vs'q

¶34

The S.H.O, P.S, E anjara Hiils, Hyderabad, Tetangana State

¶35

Ihe Asst. Commisrsioner o_f Police, WCO, Team - V, CCS, Detective

¶36

Department, Hyde rabad, Telangana Statb

¶37

...Respondents / Respondents

¶38

Petition under s.ction 482 of cr. p.c. praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memoranc r-.rm of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to vacate interim order dated 12.04.2016 passed by this Hon,bte court in crl.P.MP.No. sB1712016 in crl.p.No. 5044t2016 and dismiss the Crl.P.No. 504412016 as the same is untenable.

¶39

-)-

¶40

LA. O:1 OF 2Oz

¶41

PetitionunderSection4S2ofCr'P.C.prayingthatinthecircumstances stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof criminalPetition,the Highcourt maybe} pleased to extend the Interim^{order dated 1210412016in Crl.P.No. 5044 of2016'} as extended time^{to time and continue the stayof all further proceedingsof the} impugnedprosecutioninC.C'No'16of20l6,onthefileoftheXllAddl.Chief lvletropolitan lvlagistrate,^{City Criminal Courts, at Nampally, Hyderabad'}

¶42

CRIMINAL PETITI ON NO:.45^{16 0F 2016}

¶43

Between:.

¶44

Smt.KhvathiPodille,Wo.VasiReddyChandraShekarReddy,Agedabout ;o;;;;;1 o;;: oit""t"i,^{ut" Esperanz6 corporate(P) Limited, Rlo} !L!g'-Q-zooizi)IbbJplAb-oti",^{naoa'uo.10. Baniara HilisHvderabad - 500 034}

¶45

...Petitioner / Accused^{No' 3}

¶46

AND

¶47

' IiTi"a,i,"[ld i"iir'b State of Telanqana,^{Rep. by} stiiJttielangana^{the Public Prosecutor,} and the State^{High Court} of Andhra Pradesh'^{of Judicature} High Court Building Hyderabad^{TelanganaState}

¶48

The SHO, PS^{Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, TelanganaState}

¶49

The Asst. Commissioner^{of Police,W-CO'Team-V, CCS, Detective} - Department, Hyderabad, Telangana State

¶50

ed 40^years,

¶51

4 Smt. Javalakshmi Ashalatha^{Bipeta.W/o B Chandra Sheker'Ag.} o;;^p;6i;nooi o*;e;.^{R/o li.No. 2o-est1, Davanand Nagar, ttil} alkajgiri, Hyderabad, Telangana

¶52

..'ResPondents^{/ ComPlainant}

¶53

Petition under^{Section482 of Cr'P'Cpraying that in the circumstances} stated in the lrlemorandum^{of Groundsof criminal Petition,the Highcourt maybe} pleased to quash the Proceedings^{in C.C No 16 of 2016 on the file of the Courtof} the Xll Additional^{Chief ltletropolitan Magistrate Nampally Hyderabad against the} Petitioner / Accused^{No. 3 while declaring the sameas wholly without iurisdiction} and^pass such other^{order or ordersas this Hon',ble court may deem fit and proper} in the facts and circumstances^{of the case and render justice}

¶54

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2016 CRLPMP. o: s130 0F²⁰¹⁶

¶55

Petition under^{Section 482 of Cr'P C prayingthat in the circumstances} statedintheMemorandumofGroundsofCriminalPetition,theHighcourtmaybe

¶56

¶57

I I l l I I i

¶58

pleased to stay all fur her proceedings in CC No, 16/2016 on the file of the Court of the Xll Addition€ | Chief Metropolitan IVIagistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, including the personal appearance of the Petitioner herein / the Accused No.3.

¶59

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2016(CFILP MP. NO: 16574 OE 2016)

¶60

Between:

¶61

Smt. Jayalakshrri Ashalatha Bipeta, W/o. B. Chandra Sheker, Ag ed 40 years, Occ. Pre-Schoo Owner, R/o. H.No.20-99/1, Dayanand Nagar, M a lkajg iri, Hyderabad, Tel;rngana

¶62

...Vacate Petitioner / Respondent No. 4

¶63

AND

¶64

Smt. Khyathi Podille, W1g, Vasi Reddy Chandra Shekar Reddy, Aged about QQ-VgetC^{Occ. [)irector,Ir,4/sEsperanza Corporate (p) Limited, R/o.Fl.No.8-2-} 603123130 Opp. AS Qtrs, Raod No. 10, Banjara Hilis, Hyderabad - 500 034

¶65

...Respondent / Petitioner

¶66

State of Telangana, Rep bylhe Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad fo' the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, High Court Building Hyderabad

¶67

The SHO, PS Brrnjara Hills, Hyderabad

¶68

The Asst, Comn issioner of Police, WCO, Team-V, CCS, Detective Department, Hy(lerabad

¶69

...Respondents / Respondents

¶70

Petition under liection 482 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memoranlum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate inte|im order dated 31.03.2016 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Crl.P.MP.No. 513012C16 in Crl,P.No. 451612016 and dismiss the Crl.P.No. 451612UA as the samo is untenable.

¶71

LA. NO: 1 OF 2020

¶72

Petition under {}ection 482 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memoranrium of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to extend the nterim Orders dated 3110312016, as extended time to time and continue the stay of all further proceedings of the impugned prosecution in C.C. No. 16 of 2016, on the file of the Xll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, City Criminal Courts, al Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶73

¶74

i I I I I i i I I I I I i i

¶75

These Petitions coming on for hearing upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petitions and upon hearing the arguments of Sri G V^S Ganesh, Advocate (in Crl.P. No. 5044 of 2016) and Sri A Rajashekhar Reddy, Advocate (in Crl.P. No,4516 of 2016), Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri E Ganesh, Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and of Sri A Prabhakar Rao, Advocate for the Unofficial Respondent No. 4 (in Both the Cases).

¶76

The Court made the following Common Order :

¶77

¶78

THE HONOIIRABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL

¶79

CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.5O44 & 4516 oF 2016

¶80

COMMON ORDER:

¶81

Since both these Criminal Petitions are arising out of same Calendar Case before the trial Court and the parties are also one alld the same, these matters are disposed of by way of this Oommon Order.

¶82

Cr:ir-rina-l Petition No.5044 of 2076 is filed uncler Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, l9Z3 (for short^'Cr,P.C.') by the petitioners-accused Nos. 1 and 2 to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.16 of 2016 pending on th3 file of the learned XII Additionat Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, City Crimina-t Court at Nampally, Hyderabad, for the offences under Sections 406, 42O and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC').

¶83

Crirr inal Petition No.45l6 ol 2076 is filed under Section 482 of lte Cr.P.C. by the petitioner-accused No.3 to quash the proceedings against her in C.C.No.16 of 2016 pending on the file of the learned XII Additional Chief

I \ I I I l

Metropolitan Magistrate,^{City Criminal Court at Nampally,} Hyderabad, for the^{offencesunder Sections406, 42O and} 506 ofIPC

¶88

Heard, Sri G.V.S.Ganesh,^{learned counselfor} petitioners, Sri A.Prabhakar^{Rao, learned counselfor} unofficial respondent^{and Sri E.Galesh, learned Assistant} Public Prosecutor^{for the State.}

¶89

In brief, the facts^{of the case are that accused} No.l is the company^{and accusedNos'2 and 3 are the} Directors of accused^{No.1-Company.The last Annual} General Meeting^{was held on 30.092014 and the post of} Managing Director^{was kept vacant' The recordsof} Registrar of Companies^{show that accused No'2 is oniy} Director a-long with^{accused No.3 and has never appointed} Managing Director.^{Accused No.2 in his personal capacity} created a post of^{Managing Director with an i1l-intention} and entered into an^{agreementwith complainant' Accused} No.2 conducted all^{the affairs of the Company with} complainant, as if he^{was Managing Director of the} company with the help of^{other accused.A11 accusedin}

¶90

¶91

¶92

collusion with € ach other withdrew amounts fraudulently and committec breach of agreement to reach new agreement with new franchisee, while the agreement with complainant rvirs in force. Thereby, all the accused cheated the complainant.

¶93

. 6. Learrred counsel for petitioners submitted that the dispute is of civil in nature and that the learned Magistrate comnritted error in taking cognizance of offences and that the ngredients of alleged offences are not attracted in atly manner to constitute the offences punishable und3r Sections 420, 406 and 506 of IpC. Therefore, prayerl this Court to allow this Criminal petition by quashing ihe criminal proceedings against the petitioners.

¶94

7 . On the other hand, Iearned Assistant public Prosecutor appearing for the State as well as learned counsel for unofficial respondent contended that it is not a fit case to quash the proceedings against petitioners at this juncture and the matter is to be decided after conducting iie

¶95

ffi

¶96

¶97

trial by the Court^{below and prayed to dismiss this} Criminal Petition.

¶98

As seen from the^{proceeding sheet, this Court} vide Orders dated^{31.03.2016 and 12.04.2016 respectively} in both these Criminal^{Petitions gralted stay of al1 further} proceedings before the trial^{Court.But, the said interim} orders are not^{extendedfrom time to time'}

¶99

g. A perusal of the record would disclose that accused. No.3 is^{the wife of accusedNo 2 and she did not} act directly in^{the day-to-daysaffairs of the Company and} her signature^{was subscribed in the personal capacity' It} is to be noted^{here that tho name of accused No'3 is not} mentioned in^{the agreement,in question'Therefore'no} criminal liabiiity^{can be attributed to her'}

¶100

Now coming^{to the liability of accusedNos'1} and 2, prima facie,^{lhere are allegationswhich requiredto} be decided during^{the trial' Therefore, this Court is of the} view that truth or^{otherwise of the allegations made against}

¶101

¶102

accused No.1 and 2 can be^{decidedonly after conducting} fu11-fledged tri,il

¶103

1 i . Co:rsidering the above submissions made^by both sides anl in view of the facts and circumstances^of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Criminat Peti ion No.5044 of 2016 without going into merits and demerits of the factual aspects of the case by dispensing with the appea-rance/ attendance of^petitioners- accused Nos.l ald 2 before the concerned trial Court on each and every adjournment, unless petitioners' physica-1 presence is required by the trial Court for a specific purpose, or E.t the time of tbcording their examination Under Sectiott 313^of Cr.P.C., and on the date of \ pronouncemerrt of judgment. If pelitioners fail to appear before the trial Court as and when directed, the trial^Court is at liberty to take necessary steps, strictly, in accordance with law. The trial Court sha1l not be influenced by an1' of the observatrons made in this order, in^{any manner and} shali disp ose of the main case as^{expeditiouslyas} ossib in accordance with law.

¶104

I I

¶105

¶106

In view of the foregoing discussion, in so far as petitioner-accused No.3 is concemed, the proceedings against her in C.C.No.16 of 2016 pending on the file of the learned XII Additiona-l Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, City Crimina-1 Court, at Nampally, Hyderabad, for the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 506 of IPC, are hereby quashed.

¶107

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition No. 5044 of 2016 is disposed of and the Criminal Petition No.4516 of 2O 16 is allowed

¶108

As a sequel, pending rniscellaneous applications, if

¶109

any, sha-1l stand ciosed.

ASSISTANT^RE STRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Xll Additional^{Chief Metropolitan Magistrate'CitycriminalCourts'at} NamPallY,^HYderabad

¶115

fheXll Additional^{Chief l\tletropolitanMagistrate at Hyderabad}

¶116

The lll^{Additional Chief lrletropolitanMagistrateat Hyderabad}

¶117

The Station^{House Officer, BanajaraHills PS, Hyderabad District}

¶118

The Station^{HouseOfficer, CCS PS, Hyderabad District}

¶119

6.TwoCCstothePublicProsecutor,HighCourtfortheStateofTelangana' Hyderabad IOUT]

¶120

One CC to^{Sri G V S Ganesh,Advocate[OPUC]}

¶121

One^CC to^{Sri A RaiashekharReddy,Advocate[OPUC]}

¶122

One CC to^{Sri A Prabhakar Rao,AdvocateIOPUC]}

¶123

'to. Two CD Copies t ft-

i I I

HIGH GOURT

DATED:01 11012024

GOMMON ORDER

CRLP.Nos.50,14 & 4516 o12016

¶130

FL'
rl8 STAr 6'
{1
o o
>
.-
ll: ) iji![V2[?4
:C
ierr.1 ,.. u" (i
.-:i:::;;,-.

¶131

DISPOSING CfF THE CRLP.No.5044 of²⁰¹⁶

¶132

ALLOWING THE CRLP.No.4516 of 2016
?r-
r I l[ -<br>to I
\ C,q\qD

M/S Esperanza Corporate (P) Ltd., and Anr., v. State of Telangana, Rep Pp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Esperanza Corporate (P) Ltd., and Anr., v. State of Telangana, Rep Pp and Anr.

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

Pallerla Narayana Reddy Vs State of Telangana

Yash Gadgets Vs The State of Telangana

Mars Therapeutics and Chemicals Limited, Vs The State of Telangana

Nandanavanam Phani Kumar and 4 others Vs State of Telangana

Geesa Venkatesham Vs M/s.Manyasree Chits (India) Pvt.Ltd

Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited Vs The State of Telangana and Another