Sardar Harjith And 3 Others vs State Of Telangana And Another

This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in CC No.3017 of 2021 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class Special Mobile PCR Court at Karimnagar.

The 2nd respondent filed a private complaint before the Magistrate stating that she is the owner of plot bearing No.36 admeasuring 220 sq.yds in Ramchandrapur Colony, Karimnagar and same was purchased from Vemuganti Ganga Bhavani through her GPA holders Vengala Sammi Reddy and Gujjala Ravindhar on 27.11.2009 vide registered sale deed No.7934 of 2009. Her vendor had purchased the property from A1 herein. Having obtained permission from the municipal authorities, construction was also undertaken. According to the complainant, A1 having sold the property in the year 1987 colluded with his family members and created false document No.3963 of 2019 dated 02.04.2019, which is deed of relinquishment of rights. The said document was fabricated only for the purpose of cheating the 2nd respondent and illegally grab the property.

The said complaint was referred to the police by the Magistrate and same was investigated and charge sheet was filed for the offences under Sections 464, 471, 420, 506 r/w 34 IPC.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that a false complaint is filed by the 2nd respondent, though she did not have any rights to the said property. In fact, the said property belongs to the 1st petitioner and there was relinquishment deed, which was executed by the family members who are the accused. The question of cheating the complainant does not arise since the disputes in question are subject matter of civil suits filed by the accused herein. In the said circumstances, the proceedings against the petitioners have to be quashed.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent would submit that the said deed of relinquishment of rights dated 02.04.2019 was brought into existence only with an intention to cheat the 2nd respondent. A1 had signed on the said fabricated document fully knowing that he is a party in the civil suit in OS No.109 of 1987 and also admitted the plaint averments by filing written statements in favour of the vendor of the 2nd respondent and the said suit was decreed on 15.04.1987. For the said reason of fabricating the documents, the proceedings against the petitioners cannot be quashed.

The property in question is the subject matter of disputes earlier and civil suits were also filed. Apparently A1 was party to the civil suit in O.S.No.109 of 1987 wherein he admitted that the said property was sold to the vendor of the 2nd respondent herein. In such an event, relinquishment deed dated 02.04.2019 prima facie is false document. In the said circumstances, all the said false documents being filed before the Court would amount to using fabricated document as genuine. Further, claiming the property from the 2nd respondent on the basis of fabricated documents, the offence of forgery and cheating are attracted.

Though the relinquishment deed dated 02.04.2019 is subject matter of civil suit, in the back ground of the earlier civil disputes and also A1 admitting that the property in the civil suit in question was sold to the vendor of the 2nd respondent, criminal prosecution cannot be stalled on the ground that civil suit is pending adjudication. In the property transactions, it may amount to both adjudicating before the criminal court and also the civil court to assert their rights in the property. Only for the reason of pending civil suits, in the facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that criminal proceedings cannot go on. In the event of any transaction attracting both civil and criminal consequences, there is no prohibition to stall the criminal proceedings until the civil courts conclude and adjudicate upon the issues between the parties. In the present case, both civil and criminal proceedings can go on simultaneously. For the said reasons, the petition is liable to be dismissed.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the trial Court shall proceed with the trial without being influenced by the observations made in this criminal petition. The said findings are at the threshold on a criminal prosecution and the trial court is at liberty to draw its own conclusions on the basis of evidence adduced by both the parties. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand disposed.