THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.12473 OF 2010 Dated: 20.07.2011 Between: Narender Chand Bhandari …..Petitioner And The State of A.P., rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and another …..Respondents THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.12473 OF 2010 ORDER: Heard Sri V.Ravi Kiran Rao, the learned counsel for petitioner, Sri A.Tulsi Raj Gokul, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and also the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. Petitioner herein is the accused in Crime No.270 of 2010 of Shahinayathgunj Police Station, Hyderabad and the offences alleged are those punishable under Sections 464, 471, 477, 192 and 196 I.P.C. 3. The case of the de facto complainant is that she borrowed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from the petitioner and created a simple mortgage in respect of her house property on 24.4.2002 and also given two blank stamp papers on the same day at request of the petitioner. Her version is that subsequently the petitioner forged letters of undertaking by using the said blank stamp papers and subsequently brought a suit O.S.No.197 of 2010 in the Court of III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad for recovery of a sum of Rs.24,27,242/-. The further version of the de facto complainant is that the petitioner has forged the present letters of undertaking containing the amounts and the signatures of the witnesses which are shown in them. On that basis she gave police report. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused contended that after the filing of above suit, the de facto complainant has come up with this police report and that it has been filed only to harass him and to wriggle out of civil liability in the suit. 5. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent pointed out that normally when letters of undertaking contain the amounts, the petitioner should have mentioned the same in the notices issued, but he did not mention the same and deliberately gave vague notice and ultimately brought this suit by creating the above documents. 6. Both sides raised several pleas in support of their claims. As matter stands it cannot be said that this is a case where even if the allegations in the F.I.R. are believed, no offences are made out. The investigation is pending. In these circumstances, the relief for quashing the F.I.R. cannot be granted. At the time when the matter came up for admission, the arrest of the petitioner was stayed and the police were directed to go ahead with the investigation. Both sides agreed for the above interim order to be made final order now. Accordingly, the police shall go ahead with the investigation, but shall not arrest the petitioner and they may take a decision about the arrest of the petitioner after completion of the investigation. Police are directed to complete the investigation as expeditiously as possible. 7. With the above directions, this petition is dismissed. ___________________________ JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR 20th July, 2011 Tjmr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.12473 OF 2010 DATE: 20.07.2011