THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2560 OF 2022

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.1609 of 2021 on the file of XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate at Medchal. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 420 and 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘I.P.C’).

2. The facts of the case are that the defacto complainant-2nd respondent lodged a complaint before the police stating that the 2^nd petitioner is the colleague of husband of 2^nd respondent and they are her neighbours. On 20.03.2018, the 1^st petitioner approached her and requested for adjusting money for her daughter’s marriage and promised to return the same after her husband’s retirement. Believing her words, the 2nd respondent gave an amount of Rs.5,50,000/- to 1^st petitioner and she gave cheques as security. It is also stated that 1^st petitioner also took Rs.2 Lakhs from Smt Vemula Renuka, Rs.6.50 Lakhs from Vadlani Shailaja, Rs.6 Lakhs from Smt Nagapuri Devi and Smt Madupudi Devathi also gave amount to the 1st and 2nd petitioners, and received signed cheques from them. When the

2^nd respondent and others asked for their money, petitioners did not show any interest in paying the said amounts and threatened to file false cases against them. As such, requested the police to take action against the petitioners.

3. Heard Sri C.Vikram Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri D.Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1^st respondent-State and Sri Srinivas Polavarapu, learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that petitioners have not committed any offence. The FIR does not reveal that petitioners are involved in any act to attract penal provisions, since there is no evidence showing that petitioners are indulged in harassing the 2^nd respondent by any means. Originally legal notice dated 21.03.2020 was issued by the petitioners to the 2nd respondent. The present allegations are made with a malafide intention against the petitioners, when there was a demand to return their signed blank cheques and promissory note from the 2^nd respondent, which were earlier issued for security purpose in a hand loan transaction, which was subsequently cleared by the petitioners, that the existence of blank signed cheques issued by the petitioners in favour of

2^nd respondent is evident as per the remand case diary. Those cheques were not presented before any bank. As such, there is no question of committing the offence as alleged in the FIR.

5. Learned counsel further contended that the remand case diary does not establish the offence of cheating, criminal intimidation and criminal conspiracy against the petitioners and all are absolutely false, created and concocted stories of the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent is trying to convert the civil dispute into criminal case. He relied on the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Indian Oil Corporation Vs NEPC India Ltd., and others, [(2006) 6 SCC 736], Sushil Sethi and another Vs The State of Arunachal Pradesh and Others, [2018 SCC online Gau 2182] and Sagar Suri Vs State of U.P, [(2000) 2 SCC 636], wherein it was observed that disputes essentially of civil nature have not been given a cloak of criminal shortcut of other remedies available in law. In the present case also, if any amount is given to the petitioners as hand loan, the 2^nd respondent ought to have filed a suit for recovery but not a criminal case. Learned counsel further contended that according to 2nd respondent petitioners took amount in the year

2018 and complaint was lodged in the year 2020. There is a delay of two years. The offences alleged are under Sections 420 and 506 of I.P.C, but there are no averments to constitute the offence under Section 415 of I.P.C. There is no inducement or deception