THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.12289 of 2023

O R D E R :

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner-accused seeking to quash the proceedings against her in C.C.No.13510 of 2022 on the file of the learned VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad, arising out of Crime No.99 of 2021 of Malakpet Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 447 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 (for short ‘the Act’).

2. Heard Mr. Katika Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. S.Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. Perused the record.

3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the subject property i.e., Houses bearing Municipal Nos.16-2-738/14/A/3 and 16-2-738/14/A/4, situated in Plot No.37 (Part 1/B) and admeasuring 141 square yards, falling within T.S.No.5/1, Block-F, Ward No.170, and correspond to Sy.No.318/1 of Gaddiannaram Village, Saidabad Mandal, Hyderabad, is recorded as ‘Kharij Khata’ i.e., Government land. At the time when the land was vacant, a notice board had been erected indicating the status of the land as ‘This land belongs to Government. Trespassers will be prosecuted’. However, the petitioner-accused allegedly removed the notice board, unlawfully constructed a compound wall along with a small room in the said land. Upon noticing the unauthorized construction, the de facto complainant lodged the present complaint against the petitioner-

accused.

4. Submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner:

4.1. The petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of subject property, having purchased the same from one Mrs. Nazeem Banu, through registered sale deed bearing document No.5441 of 2019, dated 20.06.2019. When the Revenue officials interfered with her possession, the petitioner filed W.P.No.19181 of 2019 before this Court. The petitioner’s vendors have also filed W.P.No.9931 of 2015 before this Court in respect of the entire property i.e., land admeasuring 1875 square yards in Municipal No.16-2-738/14. In W.P.No.9931 of 2015, this Court has granted interim order in favour of the petitioners therein, restraining the respondents therein and also permitted the petitioners therein to proceed with the construction in accordance with the sanctioned plan.

4.2. In respect of the land in Sy.No.318/1, civil disputes are pending before this Court and this Court has passed several interim orders in favour of the petitioners therein. Without considering the same, the Police have filed mechanically filed charge sheet against the petitioner herein, basing on the complaint lodged by respondent No.1-Tahsildar.

4.3. The Revenue officials/Government have filed Land Grabbing Cases in respect of land in Sy.No.318/1, however, the same were dismissed. Questioning the said orders, the Government has preferred an Appeal before this Court. In the said appeal, this Court has granted status quo in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.04.17 guntas in Sy.No.318/1. Though respondent No.1 alleged that there is criminal trespass over the Government land, it is the version of the petitioner that he is the original and rightful owner of the subject property and that being so, the question of trespass does not even arise.

4.4. In support of his contention, learned counsel relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Joseph Salvaraj A. v. State of Gujarat and others, (2011) 7 SCC 59 and drawn attention of this Court to paragraph No.17, wherein, it is held as follows:

“17. In our opinion, the matter appears to be purely civil in nature. There appears to be no cheating or a dishonest inducement for the delivery of property or breach of trust by the appellant. The present FIR is an abuse of process of law. The purely civil dispute, is sought to be given a colour of a criminal offence to wreak vengeance against