THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.5942, 5943 and 6039 of 2021

COMMON ORDER:

Crl.P.No.5942 of 2021 is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.10419 of 2020 on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2, for the offences punishable under Sections 447 and 427 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’); Crl.P.No.5943 of 2021 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.10914 of 2020 on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2, for the offences punishable under Section 447 r/w 34 of the IPC and Crl.P.No.6039 of 2021 is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.5621 of 2021 on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 3, for the offences punishable under Sections 447 and 353 r/w 34 of the IPC.

2. In all these cases, based on the complaint of respondent No.2, crimes were registered against the petitioners. The petitioners and respondent No.2 are the same parties in all matters, except petitioner No.1/accused No.1 in Crl.P.No.6039 of 2021, and the allegations in all the complaints pertain to the same property.

3. Heard Sri M.A.Mujeeb, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Sri M.Arun Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for GHMC appearing for respondent No.2.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in the present cases. Even according to the allegations made either in the complaint or in the charge sheet, the ingredients of the alleged offences are not attracted against the petitioners. He further submitted that, with similar allegations of encroachment of the very same park, Crime No.208 of 2015 was registered on the file of Asif Nagar Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 447, and 427 r/w 149 of the IPC against six accused persons. The Investigating Officer, after conducting investigation, filed a final report on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, and the said Court took cognizance and numbered the case as C.C. No.149 of 2018. The learned Magistrate, after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution, acquitted the accused therein through judgment dated 14.05.2025. In the said judgment, the learned Magistrate specifically held that the prosecution had failed to establish that the park was under the possession of the GHMC. The very same allegations are now levelled against the petitioners in the present cases alleging that they are trying to encroach upon the very same park and also trying to make constructions therein.

5. Learned counsel further submitted that the nature of the allegations made in the complaints are purely civil in nature. Petitioners have filed suit in O.S.No.181 of 2015, on the file of the VI Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, and the same was dismissed for non-prosecution and the parties have filed application for restoration, and the same is pending. He further submitted that respondent No.2/de-facto complainant, while discharging his duties as Deputy Commissioner, lodged the present complaint, however, the GHMC authorities did not initiate any proceedings under the provisions of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), on the other hand, initiated criminal proceedings against the petitioners and the same is a clear abuse of the process of law.

6. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 contended that there are specific allegations have been levelled against the petitioners