HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.3482 OF 2008 DATE: 02-09-2011 BETWEEN: A. Md. Iqbal and two others. - - - Petitioners/ A-1, A-2 & A-4. AND The State of A.P., Through S.H.O. Alur P.S. Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and Three others. - - - Respondents/ Complainants. This Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.3482 OF 2008 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 (For short, ‘A-1, A-2 and A-4’) under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash proceedings in Crime No.27 of 2008, on the file of Alur Police Station, Kurnool District, registered for offences punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. and Section 3 and (1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. Whereas the Petitioners are A-1, A-2 and A-4, The Respondent Nos.2 to 4 are the de-facto complainants (In short ‘the de- facto complainants’) in the F.I.R. For the sake of convenience, I refer the parties as arrayed in the F.I.R. 3. The case of the prosecution in brief is as follows : A-1 to A-4 in the case do real estate business in the name and style of Royal Estate Traders and with a dishonest intention collected an amount of Rs.200/- p.m. from several innocent individuals in a period of 25 months but failed to register the plots in their favour and cheated them and in that connection a panchayat was held where A-1, A-2 and A-4 not belonging to Scheduled Caste abused the de-facto complainants touching their caste i.e. scheduled caste and further not registered the plots in their names thereafter also. Therefore, A-1, A-2 and A-4 are liable to be punished for the alleged offences. 4. the point for consideration is whether there are sufficient grounds to quash the proceedings against A-1, A-2 and A-4 in this case? 5. It is the contention of learned counsel for A-1, A-2 and A-4 that Writ Petition Nos.3468 and 4706 of 2008 were disposed of by this Court directing A-1 to A-4 to submit a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Kurnool against the Inspector of Police, Alur on the ground that he interfered in civil matters and harassed the public with regards to real estate business and later, when A-3 and A-4 complained to the Superintendent of Police against the Inspector of Police in respect of the said offence, no case was registered against him and on the other hand as a counterblast, the Inspector of Police in order to take vengeance against A-1, A-2 and A-4 got filed the complaint now in question after one and half months of the alleged incident and it is further contended that A-1, A-2 and A-4 never did real estate business and hence the proceedings in Crime No.27 of 2008 on the file of Alur Police Station, Kurnool District are liable to be quashed. 6. On the other hand, it is the contention of learned counsel for the de-facto complainants 2 to 4 that there is record to the effect that A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-4 involved in doing real estate business and cheated several persons including the de-facto complainants and in fact, A-3 issued necessary receipts in that behalf and the investigation of the case is not completed and further there is no basis to say that the Inspector of Police got anything to do with this case and hence there are no merits in the Criminal Petition and accordingly the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. It is also represented that the complaint was referred to the police under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. and the investigation of the case is pending. There are specific allegations to the effect that A-1, A-2 and A-4 in the case having involved in doing real estate business cheated the public. It is pertinent to note here that admittedly the investigation of the case is pending and there is record that A-3 issued relevant receipts. Unless the investigation of the case is completed it would be premature to dispose of the present petition at this stage, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, the Petition is liable to be dismissed. 8. It is further represented by the learned counsel for A-1, A-2 and A-4 that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case a direction may be given to the concerned not to arrest the Accused. 9. In the result with the observations made above the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, in the circumstances of the case A-1, A-2 and A-4 are directed to attend before the concerned Magistrate and file application to grant them bail, which the learned Magistrate has to consider positively. It is also directed that thereafter their appearance before the Court is to be dispensed with till the completion of the investigation of the case in Crime No.27 of 2008 on the file of 214 Alur Police station, Kurnool district. Further, it is observed that the Petitioners/A-1, A-2 and A-4 are at liberty to renew their application for the appropriate remedy after the completion of the investigation and filing the corresponding charge sheet in the case. __________________​_______ G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J Dsh Dated: 02-09-2011 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY 2-4 CRIMINAL PETITION No.3482 of 2008 02-09-2011 DSH