ORDER :

1. This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/A1 and A2 in FIR No.198 of 2020 on the file of SHO, CCS, Hyderabad.

2. The petitioners are questioning the registration of crime for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC by the CCS, Hyderabad mainly on the ground that though the civil proceedings were pending between the parties since the year 2009 regarding the property in question, the police erred in registering the crime after the 2nd respondent lost civil litigation right up to the Supreme Court.

3. The case of the 2nd respondent is that the petitioners herein, who are A1 and A2 and 7 others were responsible for cheating and committing misappropriation. The 2nd respondent and his family members executed GPA in favour of 1st petitioner herein on 27.03.2006. The 1st petitioner introduced A3 as the Chairman and Managing Director of Trend Set Builders Private Limited for development of 16,660 sq.yds of the property of the 2nd respondent. The petitioners herein obtained signatures of the 2nd respondent and his brother on blank cheques stating that they were necessary for approvals in Government Departments. However, first petitioner opened an account in South Indian Bank and maintained transactions from 2006 to 2010 in collusion with A3. The petitioners and other family members also opened account in Karur Vysya Bank and obtained Demand Draft worth Rs.1,00,80,000/- stating that they would deduct the said amount from the sale price. Since the said amount of Rs.1,00,80,000/- was deducted from their accounts, when questioned, the 1st petitioner issued 15 cheques. However, the said cheques issued by the 1st petitioner were returned unpaid. When the said dishonor of cheques was questioned, the 1st petitioner requested the 2nd respondent and his family members not to present remaining cheques and entered into MOU dated 07.11.2009 stating that construction would be completed within three years in 16,660 sq.yds. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner entered into agreement with A3 without their knowledge and received an amount of Rs.6.50 Crores. Since disputes arose with respect to the property, the parties approached the civil courts, High Court and Supreme Court.

4. On the basis of the said complaint that the 2nd respondent and family members have been cheated in respect of the property, criminal action was initiated and accordingly, present FIR was registered.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the 2nd respondent having lost his claim before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP Civil No.17457 of 2016 dated 11.04.2018 has filed the complaint only to coerce the petitioners and others into settling civil dispute. There are several civil disputes that are filed with regard to the said property and the parties have been pursuing with the said disputes in the Civil Court. For the said reason of the allegations in the complaint being civil in nature, FIR has to be quashed.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent would not dispute that there are civil disputes among the parties. However, in the order dated 26.11.2015 of the XIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court in Arb.O.P.No.2739 of 2013, the court found that the 1st petitioner herein, who is the 2nd respondent therein did not file any material to prove that payment of sale consideration was made and in fact different plea was taken by the 1st petitioner herein stating that Rs.8.00 Crores were paid to the 2nd respondent’s family. There is inconsistecy with respect to the plea taken by the 1st petitioner herein. Further, the Civil Court did not believe that 1st petitioner and others made payment of Rs.8.00 Crores to the 2nd respondent family.

7. He relied on the judgment in the case of State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jeelani, (2017) 2 Supreme Court Cases 779, in which, the Hon’ble Supreme Cou