IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the necessity of inherent powers under Section 482 to prevent abuse of process when allegations do not constitute an offence.

ORDER :

1. 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. 1 and 2, seeking quashment of proceedings against them in Crime No. 109 of 2020 on the file of Machavaram Police Station, Guntur District registered for the offences under Sections 447 and 434 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 [for short “IPC”].

2. Respondent No. 2 filed the present complaint against Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 and 2 alleging that Petitioners and others have illegally trespassed into the land to a total extent of Ac. 5.44 cents in different survey numbers at Akurajupalli Village, Thurkapalli Village, Machavaram Layout No. 2 and Tadatla Village of Guntur District. It is further alleged that in the said lands, the Government of A.P. is going to allot house site pattas under “Navarathnalu” programme and the Petitioners and others have removed the stones in the said lands. Petitioners have filed a case before this Court and Respondent No. 2 did not receive any orders from the Court. Based on the complaint lodged by Respondent No. 2, the present case in Crime No. 109 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 447 and 434 read with 34 IPC against the Petitioners.

3. Being aggrieved thereby, Petitioners filed the present petition seeking quashment of proceedings against them, on the following grounds:

(a) Though Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 were informed about the orders passed by this Court in W.P. Nos. 10037 and 10165 of 2020 by the Petitioners, the present complaint was filed disobeying the orders of this Court. Hence, Petitioners have filed Contempt Case against Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and the same is pending for adjudication.

(b) Respondent No. 2 by misusing his official powers and with the support of Respondent No. 1 has installed the stones in Petitioners’ land without there being any valid evidence.

(c) The present criminal case was foisted against the Petitioners only with a view to harass them, which is nothing but misuse of powers and exercising of powers not vested with them.

(d) Without following due process of law, and without obeying the orders of this Court, none of the Respondents have any power of jurisdiction to interfere with the possession of the Petitioners.

(e) The Police out of their anxiety to appease Respondent No. 2, have registered the case against the Petitioners though no provisions of law are attracted. Hence, prayed to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners.

Arguments Advanced at the Bar

4. Heard Sri Kota Venkata Ramarao, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Ms. D. Prasanna Lakshmi learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for State/Respondent No. 1. Inspite of service of notice, none appeared on behalf of Respondent No. 2.

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 and 2 would submit that the Petitioner No. 2 is the absolute owner and has been in possession of the subject property, which was inherited from his father. He has been paying land revenue to the Government. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 who are aware of the orders passed by this Court, falsely registered the present case against the Petitioners without following due process of law as directed in W.P. Nos. 10037 and 10165 of 2020. As such, Petitioners filed contempt case against the Respondents and the same is pending for adjudication. The present case has been foisted with a view to harass the Petitioners. The provisions of law under which the crime is registered are not attracted to the facts of the case. Hence, prayed to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners.

6. Refuting the same, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that there are specific allegations against the Petitioners. The truth or otherwise of the said allegations will be revealed during investigation. There are no grounds to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners, at this stage. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

Point for Determination

7. Having heard the submissions of the learned coun