IMPORTANT POINT
The issuance of search warrants requires a clear application of mind by the Magistrate, necessitating justification and adherence to procedural fairness in investigations.

ORDER :

K. Sujana, J.

Since the lis involved in all these criminal petitions is one and the same, they are being heard together and are being decided by way of this common order.

2. These Criminal Petitions are filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) to quash the docket order dated 29.01.2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition in Crime Nos.194, 217, 218 and 219 of 2022 by the learned XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the then Government of united Andhra Pradesh on payment of certain premium amounts issued title deeds and patta pass books to 66 farmers i.e., Gunti Narasimha and others are residents of Budwel (village), Rajendranar Mandal and allotted different extent of lands admeasuring Ac.281.00 guntas in Survey Nos.282 to 289 situated as Budwel Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. In the year 1997, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District passed an order, dated 19.11.1997, cancelling the pattas granted to 66 pattadars and evicted the encroachers. Questioning the said orders, the said pattadars filed W.P.No.8512 of 2000, and the same was allowed by the then High Court of Andhra Pradesh directing the RDO, Chevella, to give them an opportunity and to file their explanation and pass appropriate orders accordingly, as such, the pattadars submitted their explanation before the RDO, Chevella, and the same was rejected vide order dated 13.04.2008.

4. Aggrieved by the said rejection, the pattadars again filed W.P.No.2412 of 2002 before the then High Court of Andhra Pradesh, and the same was also allowed setting aside the cancellation orders dated 13.04.2008. Subsequently, the then Government of Andhra Pradesh allotted 800 square yards of plotted land and 200 square yards of plotted land to each assignee in the above said survey numbers, vide HMDA Lr.No.b5/6069/2007. Further, the land was not demarcated from Ac.281.00 and no plots were allotted to 66 assignees and 82 encroachers.

5. During the course of investigation, it reveals that the accused in Crime Nos.194, 217, 218 and 219 of 2022, who are doing the real estate business came to know about the allotment of lands to the assignees and encroachers. Though the accused came to know that it is a Government land, they have approached the assignees and the encroachers and offered to buy their respective extents of land and also get them clearances from the concerned Government Departments. Thereafter, all the accused in the above crimes executed an Memorandum of Understanding dated 15.09.2020 with M/s. U & A Infra Projects for an amount of Rs.27 crores.

6. Later, as per the reports collected from the Tahsildar, Rajendranagar Mandal, it is revealed that the Tahsildar, Rajendranagar Mandal registered the above said lands to 166 allottees, out of which 145 allottees registered their lands to M/s. U & A Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. It is further stated that Vesella Greens colluded with M/s. U & A Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. and habituated to illegally trespass into various Government lands.

7. As a result, the Investigating Officer filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition/requisition petition before the trial Court. The trial Court, vide order dated 29.01.2024, allowed the requisition petition directing the Investigating Officer in the above four cases to monitor and see the above search to conduct and proceed with as per the procedure established by the law and comply the same. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed the present criminal petition.

8. Heard Sri M.V.S. Suresh Kumar, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri M.V. Pratap Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.1874 of 2024; Sri E.Uma Maheswar Rao, learned counsel representing Sri Muriki Srujan, learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.1875 of 2024; Sri E. Uma Maheshwar Rao, learned counsel representing Sri D. Aniketh Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner in Cr