THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2304 of 2012 Dated: 18.06.2014 Between:
Vulli Venkateswarlu, S/o Ram Murthy and another … Petitioners And The State of A.P., through Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another … Respondents The Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 2304 of 2012 ORDER:
This petition is filed to quash proceedings in PRC No.23 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Warangal District for the alleged offences under Sections 420, 447, 323, 506 r/w 34 IPC and Sections 3(1)(x) of Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
2. Heard both sides.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that there is no prima facie material to attract any of the offences and the dispute is of a civil nature, and to harass the petitioners, the present complaint has been given. He further submitted that the allegation that the petitioners have taken away the original document of sale deed, is incorrect since the same is filed in O.S.No.114 of 2010, and from a perusal of the order dated 26.04.2011 it is clear that the said document is marked as Ex.R13 in the said proceedings. He submitted that no prima facie offence is made out against the petitioners. Therefore, proceedings have to be quashed.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the police after due investigation and recording the statements of ten witnesses found that there is prima facie case against the petitioners and the truth or otherwise of the allegations have to be decided during trial.
5. Now the point for consideration is whether the proceedings in PRC.No.23 of 2012 are to be quashed or not ?
6. POINT :- As seen from the material papers, 2nd respondent lodged a private complaint and the same was forwarded to the police, on the basis of which, FIR was registered in crime No.73 of 2011 and after due investigation filed charge-sheet, which is registered as PRC.No.23 of 2012. All the objections raised on behalf of the petitioners are the defences available to the petitioners and those aspects cannot be decided in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and police after examining ten witnesses filed charge-sheet, which was taken on file as PRC.No.23 of 2012. The contention of the petitioners that there is no prima facie offence cannot be accepted. These objections can be raised before the trial Court and the petitioners can avail the legal remedies available under law including filing of discharge petition in proper Court after the case is committed.
7. With this observation, this Criminal petition is dismissed. The trial Court shall consider the grounds urged herein without being influenced by the dismissal of the petition. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any filed in this criminal petition, shall stand closed.
S. RAVI KUMAR, J 18th June, 2014. ssp