Salla Sripal Reddy vs State Of Andhra Pradesh

This petition has been taken out under section 482 of Cr.P.C. by A-4-Salla Sripal Reddy in Crime No.204 of 2012 of Medipally Police Station, Cyberabad, to quash the proceeding therein.

The petitioner is A-4 in Crime No.204 of 2012 of Medipally Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences under sections 420, 447 and 427 read with 34 of I.P.C.

The third respondent is the maternal uncle of A.Rani Madhuri W/o. A.Gowrishankar, who is the owner of Plot No.485 comprising Survey No.29/A of Parvathapur village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Smt A.Rani Madhuri filed O.S.No.619 of 2011 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, against S.Srinivas Yadav and three others and obtained interim injunction on 08.12.2011. A report came to be lodged by T.Nagesh before the Station House Officer, Medipally Police Station on 21.04.2012, alleging inter alia that Ramdas along with 15 others trespassed into the land of Smt. A.Rani Madhuri and threatened him with dire consequences. The Station House Officer, Medipally Police Station, arrested A-1-Dubbaka Shankar, A-2-Dubbaka Anjaneyulu, A-3-Dubbaka Ramulamma and A-5-Yacharam Jangaiah on 27.09.2012. A-4 Salla Sripal Reddy filed this application to quash the criminal proceedings against him on the ground that his participation in fabricating documents so as to deprive Smt A.Rani Madhuri of her right over Plot No.485 is not established.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the material brought on record.

It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the dispute over the property has been seized by the civil Court and therefore continuance of criminal proceedings against the petitioner amounts to abuse of process of law.

As seen from the material placed on record it is A. Rani Madhuri, who claims the property, approached the civil Court and obtained interim injunction. It is the complaint of A.Rani Madhuri, despite the injunction order, attempts have been made by the accused to deprive her from enjoying the property. The relevant portion of the remand report dated 27.09.2012 needs to be noted and it is thus :

“Ón the strength of evidence collected, it is revealed that (LW2) Smt.A.Rani Madhuri had purchased a plot No.45 admeasuring 320 sq. yards, in Sy.No.29/A, Parvathapuram village, Uppal Mandal, from the accused persons A1 to A3 herein by virtue of Document No.4325/2003 dated : 09.04.2003 O/o. SRO Uppal, RR District and (LW-3) Sri V Kishan Rao have purchased a plot No.7 admeasuring 179 sq. yds, in Sy.No.29/A, Parvathapuram village, Uppal Mandal, from the accused A-4 herein by virtue of Document No.10118/2007 dated:27.06.2007 O/o SRO, RR Originally, the above accused persons A1 to A3 are the pattadars of land admeasuring 2.34 guntas in Sy.No.29/A, Parvathapuram village, and when they are getting their land surveyed, they included the land in Sy.No.29/E and for which they got an extra of Ac.0.33 gts of land. The said extra land belongs to the family of alleged accused B.Ram Dass Goud, Ex-Sarpanch, Parvathapuram. With a dishonest intention, the said land of Ac.0.33 gts was shared equally by the accused persons A1 to A3 with the active connivance of A4, by virtue of a compromise deed vide Doct.Sl.No.4224, dated 06.07.2002, Do Sl.No.3659 dated 20.07.2002 and Do.Sl.No.49915 dated 05.07.2003 and later, the said land was given to A-4 for development. In the meantime, the accused persons A-1 to A-3 and A-5 without having any right or title had criminally trespassed into the land, damaged, cheated and sold the various plots to various persons in the aforementioned arena i.e., Ac.0.33 gts. Thus, the accused persons A-1 to A-5 had committed an offence punishable u/secs.420, 447, 427 r/w.34 IPC.”

Such is the material gathered during the course of investigation, further proceedings in Crime No.204 of 2012 of Medipally Police Station, Cyberabad, cannot be interdicted by this court in exercise of powers under section 482 of Cr.P.C.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As sequel to it, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand dismissed.