Back
VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Srirarnineni Krishna Murthy, S/o. Srinivasulu Naidu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
The instant petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[for short ‘Cr.P.C’] has been filed by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2 to 4, seeking quashment of proceedings against them in Crime No.487 of 2020 on the file of Renigunta (U) Police Station, Tirupati Urban registered for the offences under Sections 420 and 468 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860[for short ‘IPC’].
2. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows:
a. One Sri Raghavadas Bavaji, executed a last Will on 11.02.1949 in favour of one Sri Sukul Ramanadha Sharma, who is the father-in-law of Respondent No.2. Thereafter, said Raghavadas Bavaji died on 17.10.1952. Accused No.1, who is not the legitimate daughter of said Raghavadas Bavaji, without having any right, sold his vast extent of properties to third parties. Accused No.1 also tried to alienate the other properties of said Raghavadas Bavaji by a fabricated Will alleged to have been executed by him in her favour on 16.10.1952. After coming to know the same, Respondent No.2 filed O.S.No.454 of 2012 on the file of the Court I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati which was decreed in favour of Respondent No.2 declaring the Will dt.16.10
The court established that civil disputes should not be cloaked as criminal offences, and quashing is warranted when no prima facie case exists.
The court established that civil disputes should not be cloaked as criminal offenses, emphasizing the need for clear evidence of criminal intent to sustain charges of cheating.
The court ruled that criminal proceedings should not be used to settle civil disputes and can be quashed if they do not establish a prima facie case of criminal offence.
The main legal point established is that criminal proceedings should not be used as a tool for harassment in civil disputes, and the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be used to prevent....
The court established that allegations of cheating must demonstrate fraudulent inducement, which was not present, allowing for the quashing of criminal proceedings.
The court found that a civil dispute may constitute a criminal offence under S.420 IPC if fraudulent intent is present, and the mere existence of a civil remedy does not warrant quashing criminal pro....
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
