Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
JUVVADI SRIDEVI
Dilip Kumar Baid – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana represented by the Public Prosecutor – Respondent
ORDER :
Juvvadi Sridevi, J.
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.2 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in FIR No.253 of 2024 of the Station House Officer, Patancheru Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 420 , 463, 464, 467, 468 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘ IPC ’).
2. Heard Ms. Y. Sonanjali, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-respondent No.1 as well as Sri T. Bala Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. Perused the record.
3(a). The brief facts of the case are that, on 17.05.2024, the respondent No.2 lodged a complaint stating that he, along with others, is a partner of M/s. Hypack, a duly registered partnership firm. The original partners of the firm were Mr. V. Subba Rao, Smt. V. Gayathri Devi, Smt. A. Koteswari, Ms. M. Indira, and Smt. A. Bhramaramba. The firm, M/s. Hypack, had purchased land admeasuring 2153 square yards situated in Plot No.39-B, Industrial Development Area, Phase-V, Patancheru, from the Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, under a registered sale deed bearing Document No.
The court quashed the FIR due to lack of necessary legal standing and the excessive delay in filing, indicating abuse of the judicial process.
The court maintained that an FIR must not be quashed at an initial stage unless no prima facie case is established, even if the allegations suggest civil nature.
The court emphasized the importance of authentic signatures, timely reporting of partnership changes to authorities, and the relevance of documentary evidence in a partnership dispute.
The presumption of validity of registered documents places the burden of proof on the challenger, and civil court decisions can significantly impact the viability of subsequent criminal allegations.
FIR can be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure if no offense is made out, and it can be quashed in part if no cognizable offense is made out against the accused.
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
