Criminal Petition No.7447 of 2025

Between:

Maraboina Sairam Yadav, S/o. Raju Yadav,

Aged: 31 years, Occ: Business,

R/o. H.No.1-59/15/1, Maseedbanda Village,

Serlingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District and another

… Petitioners

And

The State of Telangana,

Represented by its Public Prosecutor,

High Court for the State of Telangana,

Hyderabad and another

.. Respondents

COMMON ORDER:

Crl.P.No.7447 of 2025 is filed with the following prayer:

“to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused No. 3 and 4 in C.C.NO.4196 OF 2019 ON THE FILE OF HON’BLE X JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, RANGAREDDY DISTRICT, AT KUKATPALLY, registered for the offences under Sections 420, 468, 471, 506, 120-B of IPC and pass …”

Crl.P.No.4121 of 2025 is filed with the following prayer:

“to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused No.2 & 5 in C.C.No.4196 of 2019 on the file of the X Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rangareddy District, At Kukatpally, and pass …”

2. Heard Mr. M.V.Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for petitioners in Crl.P.No.7447 of 2025 and Mr. P.Srinivas, learned counsel for petitioners in Crl.P.No.4121 of 2025, Mr. S. Prashanth, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1 – State and Mr. C.M.R.Velu, learned counsel for respondent No.2 in both the criminal petitions. Perused the material on record.

3. Both the criminal petitions arise out of the same subject matter (same transaction), hence, are being heard together. Learned counsels have expressed their willingness that matter can be heard together. Facts in Crl.P.No.7447 of 2025 are being referred.

4. On the basis of a complaint dated 21.04.2018, an F.I.R. bearing No.348 of 2018 was registered under Sections 420, 406 read with Section 120B of IPC. Charge sheet came to be filed and a final report dated 20.04.2019 under Sections 420, 468, 471, 506, 120B of IPC (bearing No.35 of 2019). It was prayed in the charge sheet that the case be closed treating as “Civil in Nautre”. A protest petition came to be filed, upon hearing the protest petition II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-X Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at Kukatpally, by order dated 20.09.2019 in Crl.M.P.No.1515 of 2019, took cognizance for offences under Sections 420, 406 r/w 120B of IPC against accused Nos.1 to 6 and issued summons.

5. The gist of the complaint is that the complainant along with one M.Sairam Yadav (accused No.3 and petitioner No.1 in Crl.P.No.7447 of 2025) agreed to purchase land to an extent of Acs.2.00 guntas situated at Survey No.116/Aa of Tellapur Village, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Medak District, for a total sale consideration of Rs.3.00 crores. An agreement of sale dated 25.07.2016 was entered at the residence of one Mr. M.Raju Yadav (accused No.4, father of accused No.3). Smt. Tanguturi Balamani (accused No.1) w/o. late T.Mallaiah and Smt. Tanguturi Mariyamma (accused No.2), w/o. Sridhar Babu are shown as absolute owners and possessors of the land.

6. Complainant states that he paid an amount of Rs.70,00,000/- (Rs.50,00,000/- by way of two cheques bearing Nos.000023 & 000024 dated 25.07.2016 drawn on HDFC Bank Ltd. and Rs.20,00,000/- by cash) to the owners towards earnest money and agreed to pay the balance amount at the time of registration. That a total of Rs.1,70,00,000/- was paid to the owners.

7. It is further alleged in the complaint that the owners (accused Nos.1 & 2) colluded with M.Sairam Yadav (accused No.3) and his father M.Raju Yadav (accused No.4) by suppressing the previous agreement of sale dated 25.07.2016 and executed sale deed dated 17.04.2018 in favour of one Mr. Kote Raju and caused a loss of Rs.70,00,000/- to him.

8. It is also averred that when complainant questioned the act of registration, owners threatened the complainant with dire consequences and had stated that entire transactions took place in front of accused Nos.3 and 4. It is stated in the complaint that owners and accused Nos.3 and 4 colluded wit