The court held that allegations in a criminal complaint intertwined with a civil dispute do not constitute an offence, justifying quashment of proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

ORDER

The instant petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , for short ‘Cr.P.C’ is preferred by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 2 and 4, seeking quashment of proceedings against them in Crime No.316 of 2019 on the file of Mangalagiri Town Police Station, Guntur District, registered for the offences under Sections 427 and 447 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 , for short ‘ IPC ’.

2. Heard Sri M.V.Raja Ram, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1. Though notice was served on Respondent No.2, none represented on his behalf.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the subject land is an open land and the Petitioners have been in possession of the said land. Learned counsel would further submit that, Respondent No.2 filed O.S.No.147 of 2019 on the file of the Court of I Additional District Judge, Guntur seeking declaration of his title and the consequential relief of permanent injunction against the Petitioners 1 and 2 herein and another and the same is pending, but could not obtain any order therein. Learned counsel would submit that the matter is purely of civil nature and the Petitioners are falsely implicated without there being any evidence for the commission of the alleged offences. Learned counsel would finally submit that the Police after due investigation filed charge sheet for the offence under Section 427 IPC but not under Section 447 IPC and in view of the dispute over the title of the property, the alleged offence does not attract against the Petitioners. Hence, prayed to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners. In support of his contentions, learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Kunti and another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another , [(2023) 6 SCC 109] and A.M.Mohan vs. State , [2024 INSC 233]

4. Contrasting the same, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that there are specific allegations against the Petitioners. The truth or otherwise of the said allegations will be revealed during trial. Therefore, the proceedings against the Petitioners, at this stage, cannot be quashed. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

Point for Determination

5. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel representing both the parties, now the point that would emerge for determination is:

Whether there are any justifiable grounds for quashment of proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 in Crime No.316 of 2019 on the file of Mangalagiri Town Police Station, Guntur District, for the offences under Sections 427 and 447 read with 34 IPC ?

Determination by the Court

6. A bare perusal of Section 482 makes it clear that the Code envisages that inherent powers of the High Court are not limited or affected so as to make orders as may be necessary; (i) to give effect to any order under the Code or, (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or, otherwise (iii) to secure ends of justice. A court while sitting in Section 482 jurisdiction is not functioning as a court of appeal or a court of revision. It must exercise its powers to do real and substantial justice, depending on the facts and circumstances of the case. These powers must be invoked for compelling reasons of abuse of process of law or glaring injustice, which are against sound principles of criminal jurisprudence.

7. Specific circumstances warranting the invocation of the provision must be present. The decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Haryana and others v. Bhajanlal and others , AIR 1992 SC 604 is considered as the guiding torch in the application of Section 48