THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4544 OF 2025

ORDER:

This criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.466 of 2023 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Sirpur-T, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 323, 294 (b) r/w.34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The facts of the case are that on 22.06.2023, the de facto complainant/respondent No.2 lodged a written complaint with the police stating that he had purchased Ac.3.00 of land in Sy.No.275 from Vajjala Vishnu Prasad in the year 2009 and had registered the land in his name. However, Vajjala Ramesh Babu and Vajjala Gopal Rao, brothers of Vajjala Vishnu Prasad, had been alleging that the land belonged to them and had been picking up quarrels with the complainant. On 21.06.2023, at around 2:30 pm, the complainant and his brother, Boddu Jayanth, were ploughing the land with a tractor and planting red gram seeds, the petitioners allegedly trespassed into the land, picked up quarrel with the complainant and his brother, abused them in vulgar language, and beat them with their hands. The incident was witnessed by Pujari Suresh, who is the tractor driver.

3. Basing on the said complaint, the Police registered the case in Crime No.86 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 323, 294 (b) read with 34 of IPC and after completion of investigation, they filed charge sheet vide C.C.No.466 of 2023 before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Sirpur-T. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed the present criminal petition to quash the proceedings against them.

4. Heard Ms. G.V.S.S.Sruthi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State and Sri Pulla Rao Yellanki, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners, have land in Survey No.274 at the outskirts of Sirpur-T Village and cultivating the same by giving lease to Muta Santosh and Karam Anji. On 21.06.2023, at about 2:30 pm, the petitioners were informed that respondent No.2 and his brother Boddu Jayanth had illegally trespassed into their land and planted red gram seeds and when the petitioners confronted them, respondent No.2 and Boddu Jayanth picked up quarrel, abused them in vulgar language, and beat them with their hands, causing damage to the petitioners' cell phones worth Rs. 40,000/-, 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that respondent No.2 has land in Survey No.275, but he intentionally trespassed into their land in Survey No.274. The petitioners' further claim that there is a pending civil suit between the parties, and an injunction was granted in favor of the petitioners. The petitioners allege that the complaint of respondent No.2 is a counterblast to the complaint of the petitioners and that he is trying to harass the petitioners despite the order of the Court restraining him from interfering with the petitioners' possession of the land. He further contended that petitioners have been suffering due to the actions of respondent No.2. Therefore, he prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioners by allowing this criminal petition.

7. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that though there is a civil dispute, it is not a ground to quash the proceedings, as there are specific allegations against the petitioners for the alleged offences which have to be adjudicated by the trial Court. This Court cannot entertain a quash petition where the allegations are vague and the proceedings are an abuse of the process of law. However, in the present case, the allegations are clear. Therefore, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

8. In light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the case of the de facto complainant is that the acc