IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.97 OF 2009 Between: Vishwanath Agarwal and another ..... PETITIONERS AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and another ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.97 OF 2009 ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “Cr.P.C.”), is filed to quash the proceedings in Cr.No.213 of 2008 on the file of Nampally Police Station, Hyderabad, which was registered for the offences pinishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 417 I.P.C. 2. Heard. 3. The Complainant along with his sister Smt. Gousia Fatima being the legal heirs of late Syed Hussain Ali inherited all the properties of their late father Syed Hussain Ali. When the complainant and his sister intended to sell the premises bearing No.4-1-397 to 400, the petitioners with a fraudulent dishonest intention to cheat the public and extort money from complainant brought into existence a false document i.e., Development Agreement – cum – General Power of Attorney, dated 30.03.1996, purported to have been executed by the father of the complainant, complainant and his sister with regard to the said premises. The complainant alleges that the said document was a false and forged. Hence, he filed a private complaint before the police and the police registered a case. 4. The inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked when there is abuse of process of Court or to secure ends of justice or to carry out the orders passed under the code. 5. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is extra-ordinary. The petitioners must show that the allegations if taken as true and correct at this stage, they do not make out a prima facie case of the offences alleged. The allegation is that the Development Agreement - cum – General Power of Attorney, dated 30.03.1996, is brought into existence by A1 by forging the signature of the complainant, his father and his sister, Ghousia Fathima. The document was fabricated with an intention to cheat the public and statutory authorities. A2 knowing full well about the forgery of the said document, became the party and A1 dishonestly and fraudulently executed a lease deed, containing false statements with regard to the consideration, in favour of A2. Both the accused are living together. Therefore, both the accused fabricated the document, thereby causing loss to the de facto complainant. As the allegations in the complaint made out a prima facie case, the question of quashing the proceedings against the petitioners does not arise. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J July 29, 2010 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.97 OF 2009 July 29, 2010