When allegations of criminal trespass arise from a property dispute already subject to civil proceedings, such allegations cannot stand and are considered an abuse of process.

ORDER :

J. Sreenivas Rao, J.

Crl.P.Nos.7410 and 8989 of 2023 are filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.Nos.58 and 56 of 2021, on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Jadcherla, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 427, 504 and 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) and Crl.P.No.7476 of 2023 is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.313 of 2020, on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Jadcherla, wherein the petitioner was arrayed as sole accused for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 341, 504 and 506 r/w 34 of the IPC. Hence, all these cases are clubbed together and disposed by way of common order.

2. Heard Ms.D.Harshitha, learned counsel, representing Chandrasen Law Offices, appearing on behalf of petitioners, Mr.M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Mr.B.Venkat, learned counsel, representing Mr.Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have not committed the alleged offences and they have been falsely implicated in the present cases as accused. Even according to the allegations made either in the complaint or in the charge sheet, the dispute pertains to agricultural land, and the said allegations are purely civil in nature. The respondent No.2 has no right or interest in respect of the subject property claimed in the complaint, especially he is claiming rights basing upon revenue entries only. She further submitted that aggrieved by the order dated 30.12.2019, passed by the Joint Collector, Mahabubnagar, in Revision Case No.D1/60/2018–File No.Rev/D1/RoR/Revn/0060/ 2018, the petitioners have approached this Court and filed W.P.No.4878 of 2020, and this Court disposed of the said writ petition on 30.12.2019 by setting aside the order passed by the revisional authority in Case No.D1/60/2018, leaving it open to the parties to agitate their grievances before the competent Civil Court by instituting a comprehensive suit for declaration.

4. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioners have filed O.S.No.39 of 2019 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Mahaboobnagar, seeking partition and allotment of their respective shares with metes and bounds, and the said suit is still pending between the parties and in the said suit, the property claimed in these criminal petitions was also included. Hence, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners is a clear abuse of the process of law. In support of her contentions, she relied upon the Judgment of the High Court of Karnataka in Shivaswamy and Others v. The State of Karnataka and Others , [2022(3) Crimes 102(Karnt.)]

5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that the petitioners, without having any manner of right, trespassed into the lands of respondent No.2 and removed the khaddies and caused financial losses and there are specific allegations levelled against them in the complaint. He further submitted that the Investigating Officer, after recording the statements of the witnesses, filed a final report, and the learned Magistrate, has taken cognizance for the alleged offences levelled against them. Whether the petitioners have committed the said offences or not has to be revealed after a full-fledged trial before the trial Court. The grounds raised by the petitioners are disputed facts only and the same cannot be decided in the present petitions. Hence, the petitions are liable to be dismissed.

6. Having considered the rival submissions