HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5457 OF 2009 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/sole accused under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash proceedings in Calendar Case No.539 of 2008, pending on the file of the Court of I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, registered for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 506 I.P.C. 2. Whereas the petitioner is the sole accused, the respondent No.2 is the de facto complainant in the Calendar Case. For the sake of convenience, I refer the parties as arrayed in the Calendar Case. 3. Briefly the prosecution version which is to be considered here is as follows: There is a site of the de facto complainant towards north of the Railway track, 1st line at Ramakrishnapuram. Adjacent to it on the north, a site of the father of the accused is situated. The de facto complainant gifted his site to his daughter. Even at the time of registration of it, there was a dispute between the de facto complainant and the father of the accused with regard to the measurements and boundaries of the site belonging to the de facto complainant. In that connection, at the suggestion of Ammula Vivekananda and Ammula Ravi Kumar, who are doing real estate business in the locality, the de facto complainant got the sites measured physically by the Taluk Surveyor and demarcated as per the revenue records and fixed boundary stones. But the accused did not satisfy with it and still is disputing about the measurements. The accused is also interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the site of the de facto complainant by his daughter. On 07.12.2007, the de facto complainant found the boundary stones missing. When he was trying to re-fix the stones, the accused came upon him high handedly owing to the grudge with regard to the site dispute and manhandled him severely. When Ammula Vivekananda interfered and supported the version of the de facto complainant, he beat him also with hands and threatened them with dire consequences. Hence, the accused is liable for punishment for the offence. 4. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner/accused that the dispute between the accused and the de facto complainant in the matter is purely civil in nature and hence, the proceedings in the Calendar Case may be quashed. 5. The point for consideration is whether sufficient grounds are there to quash the proceedings as prayed for. 6. There is clear material to the effect that the accused involved in committing the said offence. So, necessary trial of the case is to be conducted. Without conducting the trial of the case, the involvement of the accused in the matter cannot be decided. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, till the commencement of the trial of the case, the presence of the accused is dispensed with therein. ________________________________ G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J December 26, 2011 MD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5457 OF 2009 December 26, 2011 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDRABAD Dated: 26.12.2011 PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5457 OF 2009 Between: Marthi Veda Vyas ..... PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and another ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: