IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that quashing of FIRs should be rare, emphasizing the importance of allowing police investigations to proceed unless there are compelling reasons otherwise.

ORDER :

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.

The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[for short ‘Cr.P.C’] has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused, seeking quashment of the proceedings against him in Crime No.502 of 2021 on the file of the Station House Officer, Gannavaram Police Station, Vijayawada City, registered for the offences under Sections 341, 427, 506 of the Indian Penal Code[for short ‘IPC’] r/w 3(1)(g)(r)(s)(q) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989 [for short ‘Act’].

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

a. On 13.06.2019, the Complainant purchased the land to an extent of Ac.0.20 cents from the Accused in R.S.No.2/2 for a consideration of Rs.6,40,000/- under a Registered Sale Deed vide Doc.No.4764/2019. The Complainant laid fencing to the said land and went to Hyderabad. Subsequently, the Complainant came to know that the Accused was using his property.

b. As such, the Complainant filed a suit for permanent injunction and the Hon’ble Court passed an interim injunction order in O.S.No.87 of 2020 in I.A.No.186 of 2020.

c. Inspite of the order of interim injunction, Accused entered into the land of the Complainant by breaking open the lock, restrained the Complainant from entering into his land and also abused him in filthy language in the name of his caste and threatened with dire consequences.

d. As such, the Complainant lodged a complaint with the Police against the Accused, which was registered as a case in Crime No.502 of 2021 on the file of the Station House Officer, Gannavaram Police Station, Vijayawada City for the alleged offences.

Grounds Sought for Quashment:

3. Aggrieved by the registration of the said case, Petitioner/Accused filed the present petition on the following grounds:

a. In the case on hand, the alleged dispute is with regard to the property, which is the subject matter in the civil suits i.e., O.S.No.87 of 2020 and O.S.No.22 of 2021 filed by Respondent No.2 and the Petitioner.

b. The complaint is also silent as to the date and time of the alleged incident and except bald allegations, there are no specific allegations raised against the Petitioner.

c. The complaint is merely abuse of process of law and the same is filed to make the Petitioner to come to the terms and conditions of the Complainant.

Arguments Advanced at the Bar

4. Heard Sri Sai Gangadhar Chamarty, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Ms.D.Prasanna Lakshmi learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for State/Respondent No.1. None represented for respondent No.2.

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that Complainant purchased the land from the Petitioner under a registered sale deed and he laid a fencing to the said land and left for Hyderabad. It is submitted that, subsequently, the Complainant came to know that the Accused has been using the said property. As such, the Complainant filed a suit in O.S.No.87 of 2020 for permanent injunction and obtained an interim injunction. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the dispute between the parties is relating to property, which is subject matter of the civil suit filed by Respondent No.2 in O.S.87 of 2020 as well as the Petitioner in O.S.No.22 of 2021. It is submitted that, except the bald allegations, the complaint does not disclose any date and time of the alleged incident. As such, the question of commission of alleged offences by the Petitioner, does not arise. Hence, he prayed for quashment of proceedings against the Petitioner.

6. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Petitioner obtained stay of all further proceedings pursuant to registration of the crime in this matter. It is submitted that there are ingredients to attract the offence under Sections 341, 427 and 506 of the IPC. Accordingly, prays for dismissal of the petition. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor further would submit that Court may direct the investigating officer to complete the investigation s