ORDER :

1. This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/Accused in C.C.No.7315 of 2021 on the file of VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the prosecution for the offences under Sections 447, 427 of IPC and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 on the basis of the complaint of the Tahsildar/2nd respondent.

3. Briefly, the case of the 1st respondent is that the concerned Revenue Inspector found that the land in question declared as Government land under A.P.Escheats & Bona Vacantia Act falls in TS Nos.5 & 6 Block: L, Ward No.167 correlated to Sy.No.12 of Teegalaguda Village was trespassed by this petitioner and he had removed the government sign board and wrote on walls that “Trespassers will be prosecuted. This land belongs to Ravi Suri P.No.15 & 16 H.No.16-11-16/P/96, Teegalaguda, Saleem Nagar, Malakpet, Hyderabad.” The staff of the revenue office painted the walls with black paint and erected a government sign board again on 05.12.2020, but the said sign board was again removed by the accused. During the course of investigation, the police found that this petitioner had trespassed twice into the government land and removed the government sign board painted on the walls, for which reason, he has committed the alleged offences.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the land was allotted to one Lalana Kumari by the Hyderabad Urban Development Cooperative Society by virtue of a sale deed in the year 1960 and she was in peaceful continuous possession by paying taxes. Thereafter, Lalana Kumari had executed an agreement of sale with possession on 10.03.2018 in favour of the petitioner’s father and delivered possession to him. However, before sale deed could be registered, the petitioner’s father expired on 07.04.2009 and said Lalana Kumari expired on 12.09.2010. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the transaction between Lalana Kumari and the petitioner’s father was not known to either of their legal heirs.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner found some documents in his house, which include Will dated 03.02.2009 in which father of Petitioner mentioned regarding the transaction with Lalana Kumari. Having come to know about the transaction, Petitioner issued public notice on 10.11.2020 about the agreement of sale. When the petitioner found that the government has put up a board upon his property, he requested the authorities to furnish the documents on the basis of which the government was claiming title over the said land. Since there was no response, the petitioner filed W.P.No.21680 of 2020 on 24.11.2020 for a direction against the revenue department to remove the board and not to interfere with the petitioner’s peaceful possession of the property. For the reason of filing the said Writ Petition on 24.11.2020, the present false complaint was filed on 07.12.2020 by the Tahsildar. On making enquiries, the petitioner came to know that the government had taken over the custody of the land and same was published in the gazette dated 01.08.2018. Again W.P.No.13669 of 2021 was filed challenging the said gazette notification. Petitioner further filed OS No.363 of 2021 before the XVII Additional Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for directing the legal heirs of Lalana Kumari to get the sale deed registered in his favour. Both the civil suit and also the writ petitions are pending adjudication. For the said reason, the proceedings against the petitioner have to the quashed.

6. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.22822 of 2010 dated 14.12.2010 in the case of Deepthi Avenues Private Limited v. The State of Anhra Pradesh and argued that the Government has to resort to procedure prescribed under Section 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Escheats and Bona Vacan