HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2488 OF 2007 DATE:01.06.2010 Between: Ms. Nafees Sultana and another …….Petitioners And: The State of A.P., rep. By Public Prosecutor and 2 others ……Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2488 OF 2007 ORDER: The petitioners 1 and 2/A-1 and A-2 are accused of offence punishable under Section 420 IPC in Crime No.69 of 2007 of Osmania University police station, Hyderabad. A-1 is admittedly owner of Plot No.2, Block No.7, Raghavendra Nagar, Nacharam village, Uppal Mandal, Kapra Municipality measuring 322 sq. yards. It is alleged by the 3rd respondent/defacto- complainant that A-1 sold the said plot to him under notarized sale agreement on 23.07.2003 after receiving full sale consideration amount by way of bank cheque and that the 3rd respondent obtained possession of the property and was paying property tax for the said property. While so, the 2nd petitioner/ A-2 claiming himself to be the purchaser of the same plot from A-1 filed civil suit for permanent injunction against the 3rd respondent. Thereupon the 3rd respondent gave the present report to the police. It is alleged that A-1 and A-2 conspired together and indulged in fraud with intention to grab the property unlawfully from his possession. It is contended by the petitioners’ counsel that subject-matter of this case is of civil nature and that even though the alleged agreement in favour of the 3rd respondent is true, it is for the 3rd respondent to approach civil court for specific performance of the said agreement and that it cannot give rise to a cause of action on criminal side. If allegations in the report are taken on their face value, they certainly disclose offence under Section 420 IPC to warrant registration of the case and investigation of the case. After having entered into agreement for sale with the 3rd respondent and received entire sale consideration by way of bank cheque, A-1 had no business to sell the same again to A-2 under another agreement. It is a matter to be investigated into so that real facts and intentions of the parties can be unearthed. I do not find any valid reasons to quash FIR in this case at its threshold. In the result, the petition is dismissed. ___________________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU,J Date:01.06.2010. Gk. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDA RAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2488 OF 2007 Date:01.06.2010 Gk.