Back
A. SANTHOSH REDDY
Sreenivas Mothupalli – Appellant
Versus
Anjana Taggarse Motupalli – Respondent
ORDER :
This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/A-1 & A-2 in Cr.No.250 of 2011 of Jubilee Hills Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 427 and 380 IPC.
2. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners-A-1 & A-2 and also the first respondent-complainant, who appears as party-in-person and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the second respondent-State. Perused the material on record.
3. The first petitioner-A-1 and second respondent-complainant are husband and wife. The second petitioner-A-2 is the father of first petitioner-A-1. The complainant and accused are residing in the premises bearing No.265/N, Road No.10, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. It appears from the record that the complainant, who is an Advocate by profession, had filed spate of civil and criminal cases against the petitioners.
4. The first respondent filed the present complaint before Jubilee Hills Police alleging that on 19.05.2011 when she was away from India, A-1 and A-2 along with their staff, with a view to harassing her mentally and financially, illegally trespassed and broke open her office situ
If possession itself is not with the complainant, there can be no offence of criminal trespass into property not belonging to complainant.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that criminal proceedings should not be used to settle civil disputes and that the abuse of process of the court can warrant the quashing of crimin....
Criminal proceedings for trespass can proceed despite claims of civil dispute; factual examination is required during trial.
Possession based on a valid title deed suffices for establishing criminal trespass unless declared void by a competent court; a Magistrate must provide a reasoned order when taking cognizance.
The main legal point established is that a bona fide claim of right or title can protect a person from being convicted of criminal trespass, even if the claim is ill-founded in law.
The court emphasized that criminal trespass requires proof of intent and possession, and a cognizance order must be detailed and reasoned, not cryptic.
The essential elements of criminal trespass and intimidation must be clearly established, including intent, and vague allegations driven by personal grievances do not suffice to sustain criminal char....
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
