THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.26715 of 2008 Dated: 13.09.2010 Between: Pathapati Sesha Reddy and others. .. Petitioners. and The Circle Inspector of Police, Sri P.S.R.Nellore Town, Nellore District, and others. .. Respondents. ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in setting the criminal law into motion by registering Crime No.283 of 2008 on the file of the 2nd respondent against the petitioners as arbitrary and illegal, and to quash the same. It appears, petitioners 1 and 2 formed a Firm in the name and style of “Dwaraka Real Estates” and doing the business of selling and purchasing the plots in Nellore Municipal area. They introduced a scheme for providing house plots at cheaper rates to the subscribers joined in their Firm. As per the said scheme, the subscribers joined in the Firm shall pay an amount of Rs.250/- per month, for 62 months, and the winners in the draw taken every month during the scheme period would get plots. The 3rd respondent and his brother joined as members in the said Firm and got individual plots from the Firm, having won in the draw taken during the scheme period. Subsequently, seeking registration of the plots allotted in their favour, the 3rd respondent as well as his brother got issued a legal notice dated 08.07.2008 to the petitioners. According to the petitioners, in response to the legal notice dated 08.07.2008, they got issued reply notice dated 30.07.2008, through their counsel, informing as to the manner the 3rd respondent sold away his plot and also expressing their no objection as to execution of sale deed conveying the plot in the name of the brother of the 3rd respondent, if he comes forward with relevant documents, but thereafter neither the 3rd respondent nor his brother came forward to settle the issue, which itself is an indication that both the 3rd respondent and his brother have no right whatsoever to claim any plots from them or from the Firm. The grievance of the petitioners is that they have not committed any acts of cheating or forgery, but strangely the 3rd respondent, with malafide intention, lodged a complaint against them before the 2nd respondent, who, having known the fact that the litigation is purely civil in nature, at the instance of the 3rd respondent, registered a case in Crime No.283 of 2008 of IV Town Police Station of P.S.R. Nellore, against them, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 417, 464, 465, 468 read with Section 34 of IPC. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent. The contents in F.I.R. No.283 of 2008 of IV Town Police Station, a copy of which is filed in the material papers filed along with the writ petition, would show that the brother of the 3rd respondent is also one of the victims. On going through the entire record, it is evident that initially the 3rd respondent and his brother gave a legal notice dated 08.07.2008 for registering plot Nos.156 and 157 in their names, for which the petitioners gave a reply notice dated 30.07.2008 through their counsel. Through the said reply notice, the petitioners clarified that plot No.216 was allotted to the 3rd respondent, who, after acceptance of the same, sold the said plot to the 4th petitioner under an agreement of sale for a sum of Rs.55,000/- and received Rs.5,000/- on 09.04.2004, as advance, and also received balance sale consideration of Rs.50,000/- on 16.04.2004. It was further clarified that on 09.04.2004, the 3rd respondent executed a consent agreement in favour of the Firm, requesting them to execute and register the sale deed in favour of the 4th petitioner, and as per the said consent, the Firm executed and registered the sale deed in favour of the 4th petitioner conveying the plot to him. The petitioners also clarified that they have no objection to execute the sale deed conveying one of the available plots in favour of the brother of the 3rd respondent, if he furnishes the relevant documents. The issuance of notice dated 08.07.2008 by the 3rd respondent and his brother and the reply notice dated 30.07.2008 issued by the petitioners are not in dispute. Further, a careful glance of the signatures of the 3rd respondent in the consent agreement dated 08.04.2004 executed by him in favour of the Firm and also in the vakalath filed before this Court in this writ petition would indicate that both the signatures are similar and essentially the strokes are one and the same. Except stating that the consent agreement alleged to have been executed by him on 08.04.2004 is fabricated, the 3rd respondent has not produced any other documents in support of his stand. Thus, I am of the considered opinion that when once the 3rd respondent himself has executed consent agreement, for registering the plot allotted to him in favour of the 4th petitioner, the question of invoking criminal provisions of law against the petitioners, for the offences under Sections 420, 417, 464, 465 and 468 read with Section 34 of I.P.C., does not arise. Even if there is any dispute as to the signature in the consent letter or fabrication of the document, it is always open for the 3rd respondent to workout the remedies available to him as per law, instead of invoking the criminal law into motion against the petitioners. The dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature and requires to be adjudicated before the competent civil Court. Thus, no prima facie case is made out against the petitioners so as to proceed with the criminal case registered against them and, therefore, the proceedings in Crime No.283 of 2008 on the file of the IV Town Police Station, Sri P.S.R.Nellore Town, is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed quashing the proceedings in Crime No.283 of 2008 of IV Town Police Station, Sri P.S.R.Nellore Town, registered against the petitioners. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 13.09.2010 v v