ORDER :

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 (A.1 and A.2) to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.2108 of 2021 pending on the file of XIX Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Malkajgiri. The offences alleged against them are under Sections 109, 120 b, 209, 406, 420, 468, 471 and

506 r/w.Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short the ‘IPC’).

2. The facts of the case are that the defacto complainant/2nd respondent gave a complaint stating that he is the absolute owner and possessor of plot to an extent of 26 Sq yards out of total extent of 52 Sq yards in plot No.55, Sy.No.299/1, Pragathi Nagar, Malkajgiri Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. He purchased the said plot through a registered sale deed dated 31.12.2015. A.1 was a professional money lender and the 2nd respondent got acquaintance with him through one B.Udaya Bhaskar Rao, borrowed a sum of Rs.5 lakhs on 31.12.2015 and obtained blank promissory note, blank cheques and blank non-judicial stamp paper and also original registered sale deed bearing document No.4672 of 2015 dated 31.12.2015. The said promissory note and receipt were scribed by B.Udaya Bhaskar Rao except the name of lender and his address. The promissory note was witnessed by Udaya Bhaskar Rao only. Petitioner No.1 obtained receipt from the 2nd respondent for collecting the original sale deed from the office of S.R.O, Malkajgiri. Accordingly, A.1 collected the original sale deed from the S.R.O. Malkajgiri and it is in his custody. Further, the 2nd respondent has repaid a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- on 15.11.2016 and Rs.50,000/- on 08.12.2016 to petitioner No.1 in the presence of Udaya Bhaskara Rao and one blank cheque was returned to him. The rest of blank cheques, receipt of the documents and original sale deed were kept with him and assured him to return them after repayment of remaining amount. It is also stated that several times, the 2nd respondent offered to return the balance amount of Rs.2 lakhs, but petitioner No.1 with his premeditated plan refused to receive the amount to grab the property and started threatening the 2nd respondent and forced him to leave the property. The petitioner No.1 with a dishonest intention to get wrongful claim over the property created an agreement of sale in favour of P.Lakshmi on the said blank non- judicial stamp paper of Rs.100/-. The 2nd respondent neither executed agreement of sale, received sale consideration from P.Lakshmi and the accused deliberately created an agreement of sale on the blank paper showing delivery of possession of property by the alleged agreement of sale, interpolated that petitioner No.1 himself was shown as witness No.3 and Chandraiah as witness No.4, to suit their wrongful claim and threatened the 2nd respondent to register the property in favour of Lakshmi and leave the property failing which, the 2nd respondent would be implicated in SC & ST Atrocities case. That petitioner No.1 is facing criminal trial along with the said Lakshmi in C.C.No.2102 of 2019 for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 386, 20, 463, 467 and 468 r/w.Section 34 of IPC and he filed Crl.P.No.1440 of 2020 to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.2102 of 2019 and this Court granted stay. The petitioner No.1 misused the blank promissory note and receipt by filling them in the name of Petitioner No.2, thus fabricated and created promissory note and receipt and got filed a frivolous recovery suit through petitioner No.2, vide O.S.No.2640 of 2018 on the file of VII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar against the 2nd respondent. The said suit was decreed on 16.12.2019 which was not contested by the 2nd respondent. Though no monetary transaction has taken place between the 2nd respondent and petitioner No.2 through the said promissory note and receipt, the accused No.3 deserves to be punished for the offence of cheating along with petitioner Nos.1 and 2. The acc