IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

WEDNESDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE DT. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6592 OF 2022

Between:

AND

Charukonda Shankar, S/o late Sharvaiah, Aqed

Un employee, R/o Flat No.601, Tulasi Home

Himayathnagar, Hyderabad.

about 68

Apartment,

years, Occ.

Domalguda,

1

The State of Telangana, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of

Telangana, At Hyderabad

...PETITIONERYACCUSED

... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

2

C. Surendranath, S/o late Sharvaiah, Aged about 74 yea$, Occ. Retd

Employee,. Rl/o Flat No.301, H.No.3-5-599, Vittal Vadi, Narayanaguda,

Hyderabad.

...RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances

stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal petition, the High Court may

be pleased to quash the proceedings in Crime No. 374 of 2019 of RGl. Airport

P.S., Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District and pass such other order or orders as

this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances

stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may

be pleased to stay all and further proceedings in Crime No. 374 of 20i9 of RGI

Airport P.S., Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District, including arrest of the

Petitioner/Accused, Pending disposal of the Criminal Petition and pass such

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2022

other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the

circumstances of the case.

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of

Grounds of Cdminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri N. Hari

Nadh, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Assistant Public Prosecutor (TG) on

behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No.2.

The Court made the following: ORDER

CRIMINAL PETITION No.6592 of 2022

ORDER:

Projecting that the proceedings initiated against

him are unfair and thereby, seeking the Court to quash

the said proceedings in Crime No.374 of 2019 of Rajiv

Gandhi International Airport Police Station, Cyberabad

District, the present Criminal Petition is fi1ed.

petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Public

Prosecutor representing respondent No. l-State. Learned

Assistant Public Prosecutor on written instructions

submitted that respondent No.2-defacto complainant is

no more.

3.

A case was registered against the petitioner

IN

Crime No.374 of 2Ol9 of Rajiv Gandhi International

Airport Police Station contending that he committed

offences punishable under Sections 42O, 427, 447, 468

arrd 471 IPC.

2.

Heard the submission of the learned counsel for the

2

Dr.CSL, J

CrlPNo.6592 of 2022

4.

The crux of the case, ^{as could be perceived through}

the contents of the ^{complaint, is that the defacto}

complainant and his ^{family members are having lald in}

Survey Nos.151, t52, ^{153 and 30 1 to an extent of}

Acs.4.24 guntas of ^{Shamshabad Village' They obtained}

pattadar passbooks also' ^{In the said land, 31 guntas was}

allotted to the defacto ^{complainant, 32 guntas was}

allotted to his mother, ^{and 30 guntas each was allotted to}

the brothers of the ^{defacto complainant by name C'Jeja}

and C.Shankar ^{(the petitioner herein), Rama Krishna and}

Srihari. However, the ^{boundaries were not fixed' The}

petitioner without the knowledge ^{of others, entered into}

an agreement of ^{sale regarding his land and the land of}

their mother. On that, ^{the defacto complainant filed a}

suit contending that the ^{petitioner created fake}

documents and ^{forged their signatures. However, another}

suit was filed as if ^{the property was leased to the}

petitioner. While the said ^{cases stood pending, the}

neighbours informed ^{the defacto complainant that the}

petitioner aiong with others ^{is ploughing the iand.}

I

I

l

I

1

3

Dr.CSL, J

CrLPNo.6592 of2o22

5.

Making his submission that the petitioner

IS

innocent and has not committed aly offences, the

learned counsel fo