HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

ORDER :

1.1. The petitioners claim to be absolute owners and possessors of the land and building premises bearing House No.3-1-263 (Old House No.1-35/C/17) consisting of ground + three upper floors on Plot No.17, admeasuring 289 square yards in Survey Nos.36, 37, 38 and 39, situated at Mythrinagar Colony, Bahadurguda Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same under the registered sale deed bearing document No.1665/2020 dated 24.02.2020 from one Mr. Kacham Kiran Kumar (hereinafter referred to as ‘accused’), Son of Kacham Venkataiah, who earlier purchased the same under the registered sale deed bearing document No.5227 of 2013 dated 19.08.2013 from one Mrs. P. Sirisha, wife of Mr. Surender Reddy.

1.2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned G.O. Rt.

No.923, Home (Passports) Department, dated 22.06.2021, issued by respondent No.1 - the State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, whereby subject property has been provisionally attached under Sections 3 and 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act 1999 (for short ‘Act 1999’).

1.3. The relevant portion of the impugned order of attachment reads as under:

“In the circumstances reported by the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, in his letter read above, Government have examined the matter carefully and hereby issue an ad-interim order under Sections 3 & 5 of the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999, for the attachment of immovable properties of Sri Kacham Kiran Kumar (A-1) in Cr.No.49/2020 of CCS, DD, Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure appended to this order.”

1.4. Consequently, respondent No.2 - the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, Telangana, requested respondent No.4 - the Commissioner & Inspector General of Registration & Stamps, Telangana, Hyderabad, to take further action to disallow any further transactions pertaining to the subject property and other attached properties.

1.5. It is stated that Crime No.49 of 2020 of the Central Crime Station, Detective Department, Hyderabad, was registered on the complaint lodged by one Mr. Nazeer Ahmed wherein it was alleged that himself along with two others deposited chit amount of Rs.76,00,000/- (Rupees seventy six lakhs only) in a chit business organised by the accused. Instead of returning the money deposited, the accused sold out his house, the subject property, and avoided payment of amount. During the course of investigation, the accused confessed to have run illegal chit fund business and cheated gullible public to a tune of Rs.4,90,00,000/- (Rupees four crores ninety lakhs only).

1.6. The case of the petitioners is that they have purchased the subject property from the accused by paying valuable consideration and are in possession of the same. The petitioners do not have knowledge of the alleged crime and chit business being done by the accused. The subject property was purchased by the accused almost a decade ago vide registered sale deed bearing document No.5227 of 2013 dated 19.08.2013 from one Mrs. P. Sirisha. The ad-interim order of attachment under the impugned G.O. is illegal and in clear violation of provisions of the Act 1999, more particularly, Section 8 of the Act 1999 as the Special Court alone is empowered to pass order of attachment of property which is in the hands of transferee.

2.1. The case of the respondents is that the subject property claimed by the petitioners is crime property in Crime No.49 of 2020 registered for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (IPC) and Section 5 of the Act 1999 and Section 76 of the Chit Funds Act 1982. The petitioners purchased the subject property from the accused knowing pretty well that it is a crime property. The accused constructed building in the subject property with the ill-gotten money. On receipt of complaint from one Mr.