HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5406 2007 Between: K.Vittalaiah and others … Petitioners And B.Praveen Kumar Reddy and others … Respondents This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.5406 OF 2007 ORDER:- This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is filed by the petitioners/accused, to quash the proceedings initiated against them in C.C.No.458 of 2007 pending on the file of VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Rajendranagar for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 468 and 471 r/w 34 IPC. The complaint allegations go to show that the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant purchased the property to an extent of Ac.1-07½ guntas out of Ac.1-31.25 guntas in survey No.11 of Vattinagulapally village, Rajendranagar Mandal from L.Ws.2 to 9 under a registered sale deed, dated 11.05.2006. The land admeasuring Ac.2-15 guntas in survey No.11 of Vattinagulapally village is an Inam land covered by the provisions of the Inams (Abolition) Act. It is further alleged that L.Ws.2 to 9 sold their share of land to the complainant. After the death of late Kistaiah, the vendors of the complainant acquired the share of their grandfather and they are enjoying the total share of Ac.1-31.25 guntas out of Ac.2-15 guntas in survey No.11 and at the request of Kammari Kistaiah, grand father of the vendors of the complainant, the revenue authorities mutated the name of late Kammari Ramulu @ Ramaiah, S/o.late Anthaiah to have ½ share and late Laxmaiah, S/o.Late Kistaiah to have 1/4th share in the said land. While so, after purchase of the property by the complainant, as the accused persons interfered with the possession of the complainant, the complainant filed O.S.No.2228 of 2006 before the Junior Civil Judge, Rangareddy, in which the respondents/accused filed their counter enclosing the occupancy rights certificate issued in their favour on 20.12.1999 i.e., much prior to the purchase of the property by the complainant. Further, the accused persons created the fake agreement of sales as if they were executed and signed by Kammari Ramaiah and late Kammari Laxmaiah in the name of Kammari Shankaraiah and obtained occupancy rights certificate by forging their signatures and thereby cheated the complainant. When admittedly the occupancy rights certificate was obtained much earlier to the purchase of the property by the complainant, cheating of the complainant by the petitioners/accused does not arise. Further, petitioner Nos.1 to 3 along with two others also filed W.P.No.10362 of 2007 for quashing the proceedings issued by the Joint Collector in case No.F1/3919/2006, dated 09.03.2007, in allowing the appeal filed against the issuance of the occupancy rights certificate in favour of the accused. There is a dispute with regard to the issuance of occupancy rights certificate under the Inams (Abolition) Act, which will be granted to the persons who are in occupation of the property as on the date of vesting. The said dispute is purely civil in nature. If the complainant purchased the property after obtaining the occupancy rights certificate by the petitioner/accused, he cannot complaint that the petitioner cheated him. When the complaint allegation do not constitute an offence for cheating, the case strictly falls under illustrations 1, 3 and 5 enumerated by the Apex Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal[1] and continuing the proceedings will result in harassment of the petitioners. Therefore, the proceedings initiated against the petitioners cannot be continued and they are accordingly quashed. The criminal petition is, accordingly, allowed. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J 23rd September 2010 lmv [1] AIR 1992 SC 604