THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.8783 OF 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner – accused No.1 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.944 of 2022 on the file of the learned XII Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District, registered for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 120-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”).

2. Heard the submissions of Sri N. Srikanth, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 – State.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is facing false allegations and that he has never cheated the de-facto complainant and has not forged any documents. The allegation is that the petitioner has impersonated and created false. He further submitted that the petitioner herein has admittedly sold the plots under Registered Sale Deeds in the year 2009 and 2010 and handed over the possession also to the de-facto complainant and the de-facto complainant has also got satisfied with the same. He further submitted that it is the duty of the de-facto complainant to protect his own plot after the purchase, when the third parties claim the said property, the de-facto complainant has come up with false allegations against the petitioner herein after long years of transaction. He therefore, prayed to dismiss the petition.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioner has registered six plots by impersonating the original owner as revealed from the investigation. He therefore, prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. The recitals of the charge sheet point out prima-facie allegations against the petitioner that the petitioner along with other accused have colluded with each other and created forged and admeasuring 1519 square yards in Sy.Nos.94 and 95/2 situated at Mailardevpally Village, to the de-facto complainant with an intention to cheat the de-facto complainant. The prosecution could examine and record the statements of witnesses and also has collected documentary evidence which needs to be tested during the course of trial. Thus, it is not a fit case to quash the proceedings.

7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of dispensing with the attendance of the petitioner before the trial Court, unless his presence is specifically required by the trial Court during the course of trial, provided that he shall be represented by his counsel on every date of hearing.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_____________________________

JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA Date: 08.10.2025 ds