THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY CRIMINAL PETITION No.7645 of 2011 ORDER:
This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/A1 to A3 in Crime No.144 of 2011 of Pahadisharief Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 471 and 420 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have purchased the property under a registered sale deed dated 26.04.2000 and the lis involved between the parties is purely civil in nature. Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submitted that the petitioners in collusion with the G.P.A.Holder created the sale deed and that he came to know about the fraud played by the petitioners and G.P.A. Holder in the year 2010.
This Court can quash the proceedings while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the following circumstances: (1) if the allegations made in the complaint do not constitute any offence much less the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner; (2) even if the allegations made in the complaint ex facie taken to be true and correct, there is no possibility of conviction of the petitioner; (3) if the registration of the case against the petitioner is prohibited by any law for the time being in force; (4) if the registration of crime and continuation of investigation would amount to misuse of process of law; or (5) to secure the ends of justice.
The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant and petitioners are A-1 to A-3 in crime No.144 of 2011. The contention of learned counsel for the 2nd respondent is that the sale deed dated 26.04.2000 was brought into existence by forging the signatures of the 2nd respondent. Whether the petitioners herein have colluded with the G.P.A. Holder or not will come in light during the course of investigation. The Court has to take into consideration, the allegations made in the complaint while disposing of the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court is not justified in embarking upon an enquiry, at the earliest stage of investigation, as to the probability, reliability or genuineness of the allegations made in the complaint/F.I.R. The very purpose of the investigation is to ascertain the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint. The allegations made in the complaint prima facie sufficient to investigate into the matter.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the principles enunciated in R.P.Kapoor v. State of
Punjab
[1] [2] , and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal , I am of the view that this is not a fit case to quash the proceedings at the threshold.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the concerned Station House Officer may be directed not to arrest petitioners during pendency of investigation. A perusal of the record reveals, this Court granted interim stay of arrest of petitioners/A1 to A3 on 27.08.2011 and the same has been in force till date. In view of the earlier interim directions of this Court, the Station House Officer, Pahadisharief Police Station, is hereby directed not to arrest the petitioners/A1 to A3 in Crime No.144 of 2011 till completion of the investigation or filing of the final report. The Station House Officer, Pahadisharief Police Station, is further directed to complete the investigation within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above directions, this criminal petition is dismissed. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J September 2, 2014. pab
[1] AIR 1960 SC 866
[2] AIR 1992 SC 604