THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1

to 4 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in SC No.53 of 2021 on the file of VII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Mahabubnagar, registered for the offences under Sections 447, 427 read with 34 IPC and 3(1)(r)(s)(g) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short ‘SC & ST

Act’)

2. Heard Sri M. Damodar Reddy, learned counsel for the

petitioners, Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1-State and Sri S. Rama Mohana

Rao, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the

petitioners have never trespassed into the land of the de facto complainant and that they are facing false allegations in this case. He further submitted that the villagers were digging the canal which was already in existence, but the de facto complainant is under a misconception that the villagers have trespassed into his land while digging the canal. He further has pointed out that there are

proceedings of the District Collector, Wanaparthy, dated 05.01.2021, in this regard stating about the existence of the canal abutting the land of the de facto complainant. He, therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has submitted that there are eye witnesses to the alleged incident of trespass and that the petitioners have encroached into the land of the de facto complainant while digging the alleged canal. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. It is alleged that on 14.09.2019, in the morning hours, petitioners- accused Nos.1 to 4 have criminally trespassed into the land of the de facto complainant and dug a canal with the JCB and damaged the cement poles and destroyed the crop and when de facto complainant tried to stop the alleged destruction, the petitioners abused the de facto complainant in filthy language in the name of caste. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that there are proceedings of the District Collector, Wanaparthy, dated 05.01.2021, showing existence of the canal. A perusal of the said proceedings discloses that the Collector has addressed a letter to the Secretary of Telangana State Commission for SC and ST whereunder it is stated that a representation was submitted by Smt. N. Kistamma w/o. S. Prakash, to enquire into the trespass into their land and removal of boundary stones and for damaging the crop by using a JCB. It is further elicited that the Tahsildar, Amarchintha, had conducted enquiry into the matter and it was revealed that previously a Patu canal was existing in Sy. Nos.447 and 448 attached to the boundaries of the land of Kistamma and that the said Kistamma has damaged and levelled the canal and planted boundary stones and that the petitioner No.1 herein and other farmers again reconstructed the canal which was existing therein including the Ac.0.01 guntas of land encroached by Kistamma. Thus, the old existing canal was reconstructed for the purpose of other farmers for ayacut of Pedda Chervu of Amarchintha Village.

7. Thus, the learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the wife of the de facto complainant without knowing the actual facts, has submitted the petition to the District Collector, Wanaparthy. Therefore, the allegations that the petitioner No.1 and other famers encroached the land of the de facto complainant, are not correct. It is further borne out by record that the AE (Irrigations) has addressed a letter to the SHO, alleging that the de facto complainant herein was encroaching upon the existing canal and thus, has requested to take action against them. Now, the de facto complainant has come up with the present complaint against the petitioners. Thus, it is revealed from the record that there is a long pending dispute between the petition