THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.13172 of 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 8 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.174 of 2024 on the file of learned IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal-malkajgiri District at Uppal, at LB Nagar.

2. Heard Mr.Prashanth Gadipe, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter is purely civil in nature and that the petitioners have neither created any documents nor attempted to unlawfully claim the property of the de facto complainant, as alleged. He further submits that the contents of the complaint do not disclose the ingredients necessary to attract the offences alleged against the petitioners herein. It is contended that the de facto complainant, in an attempt to settle scores in the civil dispute, has filed this false complaint with the intention of implicating the petitioners. He, therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the de facto complainant had purchased the property, and subsequently, accused No.1 unlawfully occupied the same. This led to the filing of a civil suit by the de facto complainant, which was decreed in her favour. Pursuant to the decree, an Execution Petition was filed, and through the process of the Court, possession was delivered to the de facto complainant. Thereafter, the accused allegedly created fake documents and initiated further litigation concerning the subject property. He, therefore, submitted that there is an element of criminality involved in the proceedings and prayed for dismissal of the petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. The learned petitioners counsel has relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in State of Haryana and others v. Bhajanlal and others, 1992 Supp(1) Supreme Court Cases 335. In the said case, the Apex Court had elaborately considered the scope and ambit of Section 482 CrPC/Article 226 of the Constitution in the context of quashing the criminal proceedings. In para 102, the Apex Court enumerated seven

categories of cases where power can be exercised under Article 226 of the Constitution/Section 482 Cr.P.C by the High Court for quashing the criminal proceedings. Para 102 is as follows:-

"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section

155(2) of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the sa