THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.3946 of 2010 Dated:- 20th October, 2011 Between Gowda Ramesh and others …Petitioners AND The State of A.P. and another …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 3946 of 2010 ORDER:- This Criminal Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in Crime No.99 of 2010 on the file of the Police Station, Sircilla, Karimnagar District. 2. Jevventhula Laxma Reddy – the second respondent herein is the de-facto complainant. He filed a complaint with Police, Sircilla, against petitioners 1 to 3, who are shown as accused 1 to 3 in the criminal case. Petitioners 1 to 3 are brothers. The case of the second respondent is that previously one Emberi Rajaiah, the father of the accused No.4 sold the land admeasuring 11 guntas forming part in Survey No.935 situated at Sircilla one Annarapu Bhudevi, W/o. Kistaiah in the year 1966, who in turn, sold the same to Choppadandi Sundaraiah who made the land into house plots and obtained lay out sanction from the Gram Panchayat and sold 405 square yards out of Plot Nos.6 and 7 in favour of one Rapelli Devamma through registered sale deed bearing document No.3120 of 1974 and 242 square yards out of the said plot No.6 in favour of one Rapelli Balaiah through registered sale deed bearing document No.3121 of 1974 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Sircilla. The said document was attested by one Rapelli Parasuram and Kasarla Ramulu, who are no more. Then, Choppadandi Sundaraiah sold remaining plots to different persons. Rapelli Devamma constructed a tin shed in the purchased plot 6 and 7 and door number was assigned as 8-3-6. Later, the tin shed collapsed. Then Rapelli Devamma and her husband went to Mumbai for eaking their livelihood and now, she is residing at Sreeramulapalle Village. It is alleged that the petitioners herein and other accused (A-4 to A-6) brought into existence a registered sale deed bearing document Nos.699 and 970 of 1990 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Sircilla for transferring the open place of Rapelli Devamma and Rapelli Balaiah. The second respondent claims that now, he has purchased the said open plots from Rapelli Devamma on 08.03.2004 vide document No.504 of 2004 on the file of Sub-Registrar, Sircilla and the property of Rapelli Balaiah in the year 2005 under a sale deed, unregistered. It is alleged that A-6 deleted the name of complainant from the Pahanis. Alleging that all the accused have committed offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 506 IPC, he filed a complaint. 3. Now the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that A-4 was the owner of the entire lands and he filed a suit in O.S.No.115 of 1984 before the District Munisif, Sircilla, against Rapelli Devamma for recovering 120 sqaure yards of land in Survey No.935 of Sircilla and for recovery of house No.8-6-8 and the said suit was decreed on 12.03.1986. It is also his case that A-4 applied for construction of a compound wall around the entire 11 guntas of land in Survey No.935 and got permission from the Gram Panchayat. Thereafter, he sold open land admeasuring 363 sqaure yards out of 11 guntas of land through registered sale deed No.699 of 1990 dated 20.05.1990 to A-5 and A-5 in turn sold the same to the first petitioner herein (A-1_ through registered sale deed bearing No.970 of 1990 dated 09.07.1990 for a valuable consideration. The petitioners’ case is that the documents,i.e., sale deeds vide document Nos.699, 970 of 1990 were not brought into existence by them. It is also alleged that A-4 sold 618 square yards out of the total of 11 guntas of land through sale deed dated 1528 of 1991 dated 11.10.1991 and he also sold 121 square yards out of the said Survey no.935 to one Rapelli Satyanarayana through registered deed bearing No.172 of 1990 dated 15.02.1990, who in turn sold the same to the first petitioner herein (A-1). 4. Considering the facts that Rapelli Devamma and Rapelli Balaiah seems to have purchased the property in the year 1974 and that the alleged sale deeds were executed in the year 1990 and the present complaint is lodged in the year 2011, it appears that at this stage, it cannot be said that the petitioners herein are responsible for the sale deeds executed in the year 1990. It is not clear under what circumstances Rapelli Devamma and Balaiah kept quiet for all these years. It appears that they have already lost the civil suit in O.S.No.115 of 1984 on the fle of the District Munisif, Sircilla, which was instituted by A-4. The petitioners are claiming through A-4. The matter prima facie appears to be of civil in nature. It has to be seen that A-4 sold the land to A-5 and from A-5, A-1 seems to have purchased the same in the year 1990 and challenge is being made now, i.e., in the year 2011. 5. In the circumstances, I am of the view that the matter requires detailed enquiry by a civil Court and no purpose will be served in continuing the FIR which may result in abuse of process and unnecessary harassment. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioners herein in Crime No.99 of 2010 on the file of the Police Station, Sircilla, Karimnagar District, are hereby quashed. _________________________ Justice B.Chandra Kumar 20th October, 2011 Bvv