The court emphasized that uncontroverted allegations do not disclose the commission of any offence against the accused under the law.

O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

seeking to quash the proceedings against petitioner/accused No.2 in Crime No.128 of 2019 dated 11.07.2019 before the Station House Officer, P.S. Kulsumpura, Hyderabad for the offences punishable under Section s 406 , 420, 506 and 509 of I.P.C. and Section 5 of Telangana State Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act , 1999.

2. Heard Mr.N.Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State.

3. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2/de facto complainant stated that in the year 2017 one of her neighbours by name Dhanraj introduced her to one person namely Sandeep who is running chit funds business in the name and style of “Sri Kalimata Chits”; that respondent No.2 joined as a member for Rs.2,50,000/- chit for a duration of thirty (36) months and Rs.7,000/- per month and that she was paying the said amount from September, 2017; that she continued to pay the amount for fifteen (15) months and one Sandeep used to collect the amount by visiting their house. In the month of December, 2018 the chit amount was elevated and he promised her to pay the said amount on 31.12.2018 but failed to do so. In the month of February, 2019 he gave cheque bearing No.10019659 for Rs.6,23,000/- including the amount under Dhanraj Chits. On 16.03.2018 she came to know that the given cheque was dishonoured; that upon enquiry, she came to know that Sandeep has also cheated many other persons such as B.Suresh etc.

Basing on the said facts, the present crime is registered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not involved in Chit business and the documents seized by the Police are not related to the petitioner. He submits that the entire complaint taken on its entirety does not suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged crime. He further states that this Court, vide order dated 28.08.2019 in Crl.P.No.5149 of 2019 granted anticipatory bail to petitioner/accused No.3.

5. He states that there were differences between petitioner and accused No.1 and on account of the same he was falsely implicated in the present crime. He contends that the petitioner was suffering from several ailments; that he is blessed with two children and he is the only bread winner of this family. Stating thus, he seeks to quash the impugned proceedings.

6. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that respondent-Police, upon conducting thorough investigation, arrayed petitioner herein as accused No.2 in the present Crime. He states that only upon conducting a full-fledged trial, the truth comes to light. Therefore, he seeks to dismiss this Criminal Petition.

7. This Court vide order dated 07.10.2020 directed the Police Kulsumpura, Hyderabad, not to arrest the petitioner herein till 18.11.2020 and that the Police were directed to go on with the investigation. The said interim order was extended from time to time.

8. Having regard to the submissions of both the learned counsel and relying on the decision passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch.Bhajanlal and Others , [1992 Crl.LJ 2916], this Court is of the opinion that the uncontroverted allegations made in the F.I.R. or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the petitioner. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in so far as petitioner/accused No.2 are concerned in Crime No.128 of 2019 dated 11.07.2019 before th