HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR Crl.P. No. 2896 of 2009 DATED: 28.12.2011 Between: Syed Abdul Aleem .. Petitioner And 1. Syed Abdul Hussain and four others .. Respondents O R D E R:- 1. The petitioner is the complainant in C.C. (sr) No. 2147 of 2008 on the file of the Court of VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. He filed the said complaint alleging the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 506 IPC read with 120(B) IPC. 2. The learned Magistrate, after considering the matter, passed an order dated 11.07.2008 dismissing the said complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. holding that no criminal offences were made out and that the whole case of the complainant would disclose a dispute of civil nature. 3. Questioning that order of the learned Magistrate, the petitioner preferred a revision. The learned III Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad considered the matter and by giving sufficient reasons dismissed the revision by his order dated 30.01.2009. It is seen from the complaint that the complainant and the other accused are related to one another and there was some prior litigation on the civil side in which a compromise decree came to be passed. The complaint would show that the petitioner was claiming some right in the property following an earlier promise made to him. It was found by the learned District Judge that there was no proof to show that the accused made any promise to the petitioner regarding giving of property and there were no documents executed by them to that effect. The learned Judge discussed all these aspects in detail in paragraph (8) of his order. Having regard to the contents of the complaint and the reasons given by the learned Judge, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for interference. 4. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. It goes without saying that the petitioner can pursue his remedies under law. __________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J 28.12.2011 bcj