Back
DUPPALA VENKATA RAMANA
Sanapala Amamda Rao – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C") by the petitioners/A.1 to A.7 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.676 of 2012 on the file of the Court of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, registered for the offence under Ss. 468, 471 and 420 IPC, against them.
2. Heard Sri Challa Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Y.Jagadeeswara Rao, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. The brief facts of the case, as per the charge sheet, are as follows:
(i) While the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant, who was a builder, and his friend viz., L.W.2-Muddana Ranganayakulu, who was a Teacher in D.A.V.Public School, were searching to purchase a suitable land in Madhavadhara for development, through L.W.6(M.Kondalarao), they approached the 1st petitioner/A.1, who got introduced himself as a landlord and stated that there is an ancestral property to an extent of Ac.3.00 cents situated in Sy.Nos.291P, 293, 294P and 296P of Adavivaram Revenue Village, Chinagadili Mandal, Visakhapatnam and showed the said property physically to them and also showed some registered documents pertain
Inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC do not permit quashing proceedings when prima facie evidence of a crime is present, mandating a trial to ascertain truth.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for allegations to constitute a cognizable offense and the application of the legal maxim 'Caveat Emptor' in property transactions.
Cheating and forgery – A bonafide criminal prosecution cannot be quashed at threshold.
The court established that a Magistrate's cognizance of a complaint is valid if there is a prima facie case, and that the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C should not be used to stifle ....
(1) A bonafide criminal case cannot be stifled at threshold by High Court.(2) In order to examine as to whether factual contents of FIR disclose any cognizable offence or not, High Court cannot act l....
The court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C to quash criminal proceedings if they amount to an abuse of the process of the court or if quashing the proceedings would serve ....
The court ruled that ongoing civil litigation does not preclude criminal prosecutions where sufficient evidence indicates dishonest intent constituting an offence under Section 420 IPC.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
