THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Petition No.2702 of 2010 28th December, 2011 Between :- G.Yadaiah .. Petitioner And The State of A.P., Rep.by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Through P.S.Rajendranagar, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District And another .. Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Petition No.2702 of 2010 ORDER:- This Criminal Petition has been taken out under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the accused in C.C.No.830 of 2008 on the file of the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District, to quash the proceeding therein. The 2nd respondent herein presented a report before the Station House Officer, Rajendranagar P.S., on 23-7-2008 alleging, inter alia, that the petitioner herein encroached into his plot and constructed a compound wall and he sought for assistance to get back possession of the plot. Basing on the said report, the Station House Officer, Rajendranagar P.S., registered a case in Crime No.852 of 2008 under Sections 448 and 427 of I.P.C. and issued F.I.R. After completing investigation, a charge-sheet came to be submitted before the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District. The learned Magistrate took the charge-sheet as C.C.No.830 of 2008. Hence, this petition. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent and perused the material brought on record. As could be seen from the material brought on record, the petitioner filed O.S.No.952 of 2008 on the file of the I-Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad against respondent No.2 and obtained ad interim injunction on 25-9-2008 vide page No.11 of the material papers. It is also brought on record that respondent No.2 filed O.S.No.1464 of 2009 against the petitioner and his brother seeking for declaration of title and recovery of possession. In the complaint presented by respondent No.2 before the Station House Officer, Rajendranagar P.S., he stated that he has been dispossessed by the petitioner and therefore compound wall has been constructed by the petitioner on 23-7-2008. Coming to his pleading in O.S.No.1464 of 2009, he stated that in the 1st week of October, 2008 he noticed that a compound wall has been constructed around his plot. The plaint pleadings and the averments in the report, do not go together. Be that as it may, the petitioner filed a suit for injunction whereas the 2nd respondent filed a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession. Both the suits are stated to be pending for adjudication. Since the Civil Court ceased of the disputes between the parties, continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.830 of 2008 on the file of the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District, amounts to abuse of process of Court. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.830 of 2008 on the file of the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District. _________________________ B.Seshasayana Reddy, J 28th December, 2011 smr