Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(AP) 12370
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V.SUJATHA, J
G.sudhakara Rao – Appellant
Versus
K V Siva Prasad – Respondent
Criminal Petition No.2796/2019 | Criminal Petition No.2803/2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P SAI SURYA TEJA
For the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP), O MANOHER REDDY
The court held that criminal proceedings should not be used for harassment or as a tool for private vendetta, quashing the cases due to abuse of process after civil litigation failure.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 482 - Quashing of proceedings - Criminal petitions filed to quash proceedings under C.C.No.404 of 2018 and C.C.No.1704 of 2018 for offences under Sections 420, 473, 384, 509, and 506 of IPC - Allegations of money lending and harassment - Court found that the complaints were filed with ulterior motive after losing civil litigation, constituting abuse of process - Criminal proceedings quashed. (Paras 1, 23, 24)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner was accused of running a money lending business and allegedly extorting large sums from the complainant, who claimed to have repaid significantly more than borrowed amounts. The petitioner contended that the allegations were fabricated and part of an ongoing civil dispute. (Paras 4, 5)
Findings of Court:
The court noted that the complainant's actions appeared to be an attempt to misuse the criminal process after failing in civil litigation, justifying the quashing of the criminal complaints. (Paras 23, 24)
Issues: The court considered whether the criminal proceedings were liable to be quashed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. due to allegations being frivolous or made with malicious intent. (Para 10)
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the necessity of preventing the criminal process from being used as a tool for harassment and reiterated the importance of exercising inherent powers under Section 482 cautiously. (Paras 12, 23)
Result: Criminal petitions allowed; proceedings quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the criminal petitions and complaints filed. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties regarding the validity of complaints. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. court's analysis on the abuse of process and inherent powers. (Para 10 , 12 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 19 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. guidelines for quashing criminal complaints under section 482 of cr.p.c. (Para 11 , 13 , 15 , 18 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. conclusion quashing the criminal proceedings. (Para 24 , 25) |
COMMON ORDER:
Criminal Petition No.2796 of 2019 is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short “Cr.P.C.”) to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.404 of 2018 on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam City, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 473 read with 511 and 384, 509, 506 of I.P.C.
2) Criminal Petition No.2803 of 2019 is filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short “Cr.P.C.”) to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1704 of 2018 on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam City, registered for the offences punishable under Section s 420 and 473 read with 511 and 384, 509 , 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short “I.P.C.”).
3) C.C.No.404 of 2018 was registered against one Gogineni Sudhakar Rao and C.C.No.1704 of 2018 was registered against one Gogineni Sudhakar Rao and his son Subramanya Venkata Appa Rao. Complainant is one and the same in both the cases.
4) On 26.12.2015, defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the Inspector of Police, Gajuwaka Police Station alleging that the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.2796 of 2019 has been running money lending business, have extended loan of Rs.20,00,000/- to the defacto complainant by obtaining promissory notes of a face value of Rs.3,00,000/- dated 27.07.2007, Rs.9,00,000/- dated 28.07.2007, Rs.8,00,000/- dated 30.07.2007. In addition to that he obtained signatures on 2 blank Non Judicial stamp papers of the face value of Rs.100/- in the name GSVA Rao vide No.550 dated. 12.02.2007, stamp paper worth of Rs.100 No.4495 dated 16.08.2005 SI.No.06AAA823040 issued in the name of the accused, 5 blank bond papers with his signatures and thumb impressions, signatures on one bond paper without Revenue stamps, signatures and thumb impressions on 2 blank white papers, 3 blank cheques of ING Vysya Bank vide Cheque No.407022, 407021 and 407020 of his account as surety. Apart from that he mortgaged his property on 01.08.2007 to an extent of Ac.3.43 cents at Maduturu Village of Atchutapuram Mandal in Sy.No.399/2 within the limits of the Sub Registry of Yelamanchili under mortgage deed and term of interest @ Rs.3/- per month. Accordingly, he used to collect Rs.1,20,000/- per month towards interest @ Rs.3/- per month, besides of which he used to take away the wine from his shop on free of cost for his own use. The accused neither issued the receipts nor put signatures for the amount paid towards interest by saying that he would enter the same in his account books and no need to issue the receipts. Accordingly, he paid the amount till February 2014, which is 4 and half times more than the borrowed amount i.e. Rs. 90,00,000/-, after that defacto complainant expressed his Inability to pay the remaining amount and requested him to exonerate him. On that, the petitioner herein demanded Rs.40,00,000/- for full and final settlement, further started blackmailing him that he would file false cases against the complainant. Basing the said complaint, the then Inspector of Police, Gajuwaka Police Station has registered a case in Crime No.560 of 2015 under Sections 420, 384, 506 of I.P.C. of Gajuwaka Police Station, and the same was registered as a C.C.No.404 of 2018 on the file of III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Gajuwaka. The petitioner filed criminal petition No.2796 of 2019 seeking to quash the C.C.No.404 of 2018.
5) On the same day i.e. on 26.12.2015, defacto complainant lodged another report again
