THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10978 OF 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.163 of 2025 on the file of learned Judicial Metropolitan Magistrate, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) read with

3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNS’).

2. Heard Sri Lingala Sudheer, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have neither cheated nor committed any criminal breach of trust as alleged. None of the ingredients in the complaint attract the offences alleged against the petitioners herein. He further submitted that the dispute is purely of civil in nature. In case, the allegations of the de facto complainant are true and the petitioners have received the advance sale consideration and failed to register the land in the name of the de facto complainant, then a Suit for specific performance has to be filed before the competent civil Court, instead the de facto complainant has resorted to criminal proceedings, which is not justified and not maintainable. He further submitted that petitioner No.2 herein has filed a Writ Petition vide W.P.No.15049 of 2024 before this Court and obtained orders in his favour, wherein the revenue authorities were directed to dispose of the mutation application filed by petitioner No.2 herein within a period of eight weeks. Thus, the de facto complainant has falsely filed the present case against the petitioners herein. Learned counsel, in support of his submissions, relied upon a judgment of the co- ordinate bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.5435 of 2018, dated 09.01.2023. He, therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings in the present C.C. against the petitioners herein.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation reveals that the petitioners herein have created a document without there being any land in existence and thus, there is an element of criminality in this case. Hence, the criminal proceedings are maintainable. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. It is alleged that the de facto complainant is in acquaintance with petitioner No.1, who is an agent in Jana Chaitanya Real Estate Corporation, and out of the said acquaintance, believing the words of petitioner No.1, he has expressed his interest to purchase land. Then a proposal came from petitioner No.1 that there is land admeasuring Ac.2-00 in Survey No.387 at Shabad worth Rs.60,00,000/-, and that they shall take one acre each. The de facto complainant has agreed to the said proposal and initially, he has paid an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- to petitioner No.1. Thereafter, petitioner No.1 brought agreement papers to the de facto complainant’s house, which is already signed by petitioner Nos.2 and 3 herein as vendors and by petitioner No.1 as one of the vendees. Then the de facto complainant also signed on the said agreement believing petitioner No.1. Thereafter, the de facto complainant has again transferred Rs.5,00,000/-. Subsequently, on his persistent demands also, registration of the land did not take place. On his enquiry, the de facto complainant came to know that no such land existed in the name of petitioner No.2-Gaddam Laxmaiah. It is alleged that though there is no land available in the name of petitioner No.2, petitioner No.1 has made the de facto complainant to believe in existence of the land and has induced him to pay the amounts and thereafter, the petitioners in collusion have denied registration of the land, as there is no such land in existence. The allegation against the petitioners herein is that the said agreement of sale itself is a fake document, as it appears to have been executed with regard