IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J.
Chekka Guru Murali Mohan & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh through SHO, CID PS, AP, Mangalagiri, Guntur District, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Petition Nos.4819, 4843, 4844, 4867, 4938 and 5384 of 2020
Decided On : 19-01-2021
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 420, 409, 406 and 120-B- Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 482 - Criminal Petitions - Seeking Quash - Cognizable offence - Preliminary enquiry report - As per record as per instructions of Additional Deputy General of Police C-I-D- A-P preliminary enquiry was ordered on allegations set out in said report - Accordingly Sri R-S- has conducted a preliminary enquiry relating to said allegations- He has submitted his preliminary enquiry report to Addl on stating that he has enquired one village and he stated that in month of village approached him and asked him to sell his land to Good Life Estates Private Limited and he refused - Thereafter he again came to him and pressurized him to sell property for Lakhs and accordingly he sold said land to Good Life Estates Private Limited represented by K- and that few months thereafter then Government announced location of capital at area and village is also located in capital region and consequently value of land has increased
Finding of court: Concept of offence of insider trading which is essentially an offence in field of stock market relating to selling and buying securities and bonds cannot be applied to offences under Indian Penal Code and cannot be read into Section 420 IPC or into any provisions in scheme of Indian Penal Code- said concept of offence of insider trading is totally alien to IPC and it is unknown to our criminal jurisprudence under Indian Penal Code - So it cannot even contextually or relatively applied to facts of case to prosecute petitioners - Applying said concept of insider trading to facts of case to prosecute petitioners is totally misconceived and legally unsustainable in given facts and circumstances of case- petitioners have no legal obligation to disclose information relating to latent advantages in purchasing land to sellers at time of buying said land - Therefore it does not amount to dishonest concealment of fact as contemplated under Explanation appended to Section 415 IPC - It does not amount to any deception under Section 420 IPC read with Section 415 IPC - Sellers did not sustain any loss on account of said sale transactions
Result: Criminal Petitions are allowed
ORDER :
This batch of Criminal Petitions, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., are filed, seeking quash of the common F.I.R. in Crime No.49 of 2020 of C.I.D.P.S., A.P., Amaravati of Mangalagiri, registered against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 406 and 120-B of I.P.C.
2. A person by name Sri Salivendra Suresh of Velagapudi village, who is totally a stranger to the sale transactions in question, which are sought to be impeached on the ground of playing fraud and cheating the sellers of the land by the petitioners, who are purchasers of the lands, lodged a report with Mangalagiri Police.
3. Synoptic outline of the contents of the report germane to dispose of these Criminal Petitions may be stated as follows:
(a) It is alleged in the report that the de facto complainant is a resident of Velagapudi village, which is situated within the Capital Region Development Authority (hereinafter called as “C.R.D.A.”). He has been following the news being published and the debates in the Legislative Assembly relating to the irregularities that took place in respect of the lands situated within the capital area. There has been no capital for the State of Andhra Pradesh after the erstwhile common State of Andhra Pradesh was bifurcated into two States i.e. the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh. Therefore, as per the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, Sivaramakrishna Committee was constituted to decide as to where the capital for the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh is to be located. The then Chief Minister Sri Nara Chandra Babu Naidu brought the Capital Region Development Authority Act in the month of December, 2014 and declared that 25 villages which are adjacent to the Krishna River will be the capital region.
(b) However, even prior to it several people who got acquaintance with important people in the Government got information as to where the capital would be located and they purchased the lands within the said area and adjacent to the C.R.D.A. region from the farmers of that locality deceptively.
(c) Whileso, after the month of July, 2019 it has been widely published in the media that persons who got close acquaintance with the important persons in the erstwhile government purchased lands in their names and in the name of their companies on the basis of the prior information got to them regarding location of the capital city and that the farmers, who have no information regarding location of capital in their area, have sold the lands. He also came to know when the Bill was introduced in the Assembly by the present Government to abolish the C.R.D.A. enactment, during the debates took place in the Assembly, that officials who worked in the Government in high positions and the political leaders who are in power at that time have purchased lands in their names and in binami names by using their black money within the C.R.D.A. region and adjoining the said C.R.D.A. region for paltry sale consideration and thereby had monetary gain for them. All this was done as per the conspiracy hatched up between the officials and the political leaders and the persons who purchased the said lands.
(d) Therefore, when he verified the sale transactions that took place in the C.R.D.A. region in the website of the Registration Department, it came to light that (1) Lalitha Super Specialty Hospital; (2) Sri Thottempudi Venkateswara Rao, Cherukuri Tejaswi of North West Holdings Private Limited which belongs to them; (3) Sri C. D. Murali Mohan and Sri B.V.R. Sarma to whom Vertex Homes Private Limited belongs; (4) Gayathri Realtors Limited, Chennai; (5) Smt. Kilaru Srihasa W/o. Kilaru Rajesh, who is close associate of Sri Nara Chandra Babu Naidu and Sri Nara Lokesh and (6) Good Life Estates, Vijayawada, (petitioners herein) have purchased vast extent of lands in the said capital region area and near to it. It is stated that as per the information collected by the de facto complainant, even before officially declaring the area whe
A.R. Antulay v. Ramdas Sriniwas Nayak and Ors.
Shriram Krishnappa Asegaonkar v. State of Maharashtra
Chairman, Indore Vikas Pradhikaran v. Pure Industrial Coke & Chemicals Ltd.
Tuka Ram Kana Joshi v. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation
Mohd. Ibrahim v. State of Bihar
Esher Singh v. State of Andhra Pradesh
V.C. Shukla v. State (Delhi Admn.)
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
Vesa Holdings Private Limited v. State of Kerala
State of Karnataka v. Arun Kumar Agarwal
Umesh Kumar v. State of Andhra Pradesh
Prakash Singh Badal v. State of Punjab
S. Pratap Singh v. State of Punjab
Imtiyaz Ahmad v. State of U.P.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.