IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.15228 OF 2025 DATE: 09 -01-2026 Between:

K. Padmavati … Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, At Hyderabad and another ... Respondents

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the proceedings against her in C.C.No.2157 of 2024 on the file of learned Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-IV Judicial Magistrate of First Class, L.B. Nagar, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, registered for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 read with

34 I.P.C.

2. Heard Sri B. Ramdas, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner herein is accused No.2. It is alleged that the husband of the petitioner entered into a private sale agreement with the de facto complainant, but failed to execute the Sale Deed in favour of the de facto complainant. It is further alleged that the husband of the petitioner executed a Gift Deed in favour of the petitioner in respect of the subject property. He further submitted that it is only a civil litigation and even according to the de facto complainant, the sale agreement was executed 33 years ago. He further submitted that the present complaint is filed with an ulterior motive. He further submitted that the civil Suit filed by the de facto complainant is pending between the parties and in spite of the same, the de facto complainant has filed the present complaint, which is not just and proper. He, therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings in the present C.C. against the petitioner herein.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the husband of the petitioner has received the total sale consideration in the year 1991, but failed to register the land in favour of the de facto complainant and has gifted the subject property to the petitioner in the year 2023 and thereafter, sold the same to accused No.3 in the year 2024. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. The contents of the complaint point out that the de facto complainant has paid total sale consideration to his cousin brother (husband of the petitioner) and has entered into a notarized agreement of sale in respect of land admeasuring 133.3 Square Yards in Plot No.126 in Survey Nos.part of 3 and 6 situated at Chengicherla Village on 29.09.1991, and that subsequently, he has been insisting his brother for execution of Sale Deed, but his brother has been postponing the same on one pretext or the other. Subsequently, his brother has executed a Gift Deed on 15.05.2023 in favour of his wife (petitioner herein), who, in turn, has executed Sale Deed in favour of third party vide document No.2844 of 2024, dated 20.03.2024. The case is registered for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 I.P.C. The petitioner has filed a copy of the agreement of sale. It is dated 29.09.1991 and the complaint is filed on 02.08.2024. The alleged gift deed is said to have been executed by accused No.1 (brother of the de facto complainant) in favour of the petitioner- accused No.2, who is the wife of accused No.1, on 15.05.2023 and the alleged Sale Deed in favour of accused No.3 is said to have been executed on 20.03.2024. Here, it is pertinent to refer to Sections 405, 406 and 420 I.P.C. and the same are extracted hereunder:

“405. Criminal breach of Trust.- Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust, or willf