Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Y.LAKSHMANA RAO
Bapireddy Balaji Reddy, S/O Lakshma Reddy – Appellant
Versus
state of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Public Prosecutor, High Court Judicature, Amaravathi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the factual background of the case involves property disputes. (Para 1 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 2. the parties' arguments center around the classification of disputes as civil or criminal. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. criminal law should not be used to resolve civil disputes. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 4. court quashed criminal proceedings due to civil nature of the dispute. (Para 16) |
ORDER :
Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J.
1. The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity, “the Cr.P.C.”) / Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, “the BNSS ”), seeking to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.3 and 4 in C.C. No.639 of 2020 on the file of the learned Additional First Class Magistrate, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, “the I.P.C.”).
2. Sri Mahadeva Kanthrigala, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the dispute between the petitioners and the 2nd respondent is purely civil in nature, arising out of rival claims over the subject property, and that the same is already the subject
Criminal proceedings should not be pursued when the dispute is purely civil and lacks essential elements of a cognizable offence, to prevent misuse of criminal law.
The court held that criminal proceedings cannot continue when the underlying dispute is civil in nature, to prevent abuse of the judicial process.
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 court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the allegations did not constitute a criminal offence and were purely civil in nature.
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 civil disputes cannot be disguised as criminal offences, and allegations of conspiracy and forgery necessitate a full trial.
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
