SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(AP) 1543

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.
Bussa Rajendra and others – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh and others – Respondent
Crl. P No.377 of 2020
Decided On : 02-09-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : S. Varadarajulu Chetty
For the Respondent: (Mrs.) D. Prasanna Lakshmi (Assistant Public Prosecutor); S. Parineetha

The court can quash criminal proceedings under inherent powers if the allegations stem from a civil dispute and fail to establish a prima facie case for the alleged criminal offences.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, Sections 447, 379, 506 - Quashment of criminal proceedings - Petitioners sought to quash proceedings for alleged criminal trespass and theft regarding disputed property - Dispute primarily centered around civil ownership and possession rights - Court found allegations constitute a civil dispute cloaked as a criminal matter - No prima facie case established against the petitioners. (Paras 1, 8, 14, 16)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Inherent powers of the High Court - Powers exercised to prevent abuse of the process of the Court and secure ends of justice - Factors determining exercise of powers outlined - Criminal proceedings may be quashed when allegations do not disclose a cognizable offence or appear absurd. (Paras 8, 10, 12)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners accused of theft and trespass on land claimed by respondents, who rely on a disputed Gift Deed. Accused assert land ownership based on various records, including cancellation of respondents' registrations. Arguments suggest complaints are motivated by malice amidst ongoing civil disputes.

Findings of Court:
No prima facie case against the petitioners was established; allegations were found to arise from civil disputes regarding property rights.

Issues: The pivotal question was whether the allegations justified criminal proceedings against the petitioners in light of existing civil disputes.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the allegations in the complaint were baseless and reflective of a civil dispute, warranting quashing of charges to prevent abuse of the legal process.

Result: Petition granted; proceedings quashed against the petitioners.

Table of Content
1. factual background of property dispute. (Para 2)
2. arguments regarding false allegations and ownership. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. court's jurisdiction under section 482. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. assessment of criminal versus civil nature of dispute. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
5. decision to quash proceedings based on lack of merit. (Para 15)
6. final order to quash the criminal proceedings. (Para 16 , 17)

JUDGMENT /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.1 to 4, seeking quashment of proceedings against them in CC No.1822 of 2019 on the file of the Court of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chittoor for the offence under Sections 447 , 379 and 506 read with 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , (for short "IPC").

2. The factual background leading to filing of this petition :

    (a) Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are the residents of Thumbapalem Village, Bangarupalem Mandal. There are property disputes between respondent Nos.2 and 3 on one hand and accused Nos.1 to 4 on the other. Originally respondent No.3 is the owner of the land to an extent of Ac.0.56 cents out of Ac.0.76 cents in Sy.No.56-3D on the accounts of Thumba, Bangarupalem Mandal, having acquired the same under a registered Gift Deed vide Doc.No.1499/2017, dated 20.11.2017 from his father P. Nagabhushanam and has been in possession and enjoyment of the same.

    (b) There are toms, Mango and coconut trees in the said land and respondent No.2 has been looking after the said land, as per the directions of respondent No.3. As Accused No.1 has been claiming right over the said land, respondent No.3 filed OS No.621 of 2017 in the Court of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor and the same is pending. While so, on 11.06.2019 at about 10.00 p.m., accused Nos.1 to 4 criminally trespassed into the Mango Garden of respondent No.3, committed theft of Mangoes, lodged them in Tractor and Trailer Bearing Nos.AP-04-B-6101 and AP-04-B-6102 for transporting them illegally for unlawful gain. On coming to know about the same, when respondent No.2 came there and questioned the accused Nos.1 to 4 about their illegal acts, they threatened him with dire consequences and abused in filthy language.

    (c) Inspite of the advice of the elders that they will settle the issue on the next day morning and asked the accused to leave the mango load, accused Nos.1 to 4 did not heed to them, took away the mangoes and disposed the same. Again on the same night, the accused committed theft of Mangoes for second time.

    (d) On 12.06.2019 at about 08.00 a.m., on coming to know about the above incident, when respondent No.2 and his relatives questioned the accused, all the accused got enraged, abused them in filthy language and threatened with dire consequences that they will do away with their lives, if they object them for transporting the stolen mangoes. Accused Nos.1 to 4 caused loss to the tune of Rs.1 lakh to respondent Nos.2 and 3.

    (e) On the report lodged by respondent No.2, a case in Crime No.77 of 2019 of Bangarupalem Police Station, was registered against accused Nos.1 to 4 for the offence under Sections 447 , 379 and 506 read with 34 IPC.

    (f) After completion of investigation, the Police filed charge-sheet which was numbered as CC No.1822 of 2019 on the file of the Court of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chittoor.

    (g) Seeking quashment of the CC the present Crl. P is filed.

Grounds sought for quashment :

3. Aggrieved by the registration of the said case, petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 filed the present petition seeking quashment of the proceedings against them, on the following grounds:

    (a) Respondent No.2 lodged a complaint, without possession, valid document and right over the said land.

    (b) Respondent No.3 has been claiming the property without any valid document and possession.

    (c) The brother of respondent Nos.2 and 3 namely Ponne Devendraiah lodged a similar complai

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top