IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.4001 of 2009 DATE:17.08.2010 Between: Abdul Hakeem and others …… Petitioners And: The State of A.P. rep. by its Public Prosecutor And another …..Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.4001 of 2009 ORDER : The petitioners 1 to 8/A-1 to A-8 are accused of offence punishable under Sections 384, 379, 420, 466, 506 and 120-B I.P.C in Crime No.111/2009 of III Town Police Station, Nizamabad. When the defacto- complainant/2nd respondent filed private complaint before the Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Nizamabad, the Magistrate referred the same for investigation and report to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. It is alleged that seven cheques bearing Nos.303476 to 303482 of State Bank of India, A.C.Guards Branch, Hyderabad which were signed by the complainant were stolen and found missing and that it came to the 2nd respondent’s knowledge on 07.04.2004. A-5 is no other than son-in-law of the 2nd respondent. Other accused are brothers and sister-in-law of A-5. The complainant alleges that A-5 at the instigation of the other accused committed theft those seven cheques. The cheques are stated to belong to Kalpavalli Sugar and Power Limited, of which the complainant is the Chairman. It is further alleged that when demanded, the accused returned four cheques, but they were found to be fake cheques. It is stated by the petitioners’ counsel that till now no litigation is filed by any of the petitioners against the 2nd respondent on the basis of those cheques for the last six years. It is further stated that except A-1 to whom the complainant owes money, there is no other claim for any of the other accused. It is evident that wholesale allegations are made against all family members of A-5 due to internal bickerings between the 2nd respondent and A-5 by roping in persons including family ladies. It is not known why the complainant kept blank cheques with his signatures thereon. It is evident that the complainant has come up with this complaint with a view to forestall A-1 and others with any future litigation based on those cheques. This Court is of the opinion that private complaint of the 2nd respondent is nothing but abuse of process of law and abuse of process of Court intended to settle private scores between the 2nd respondent and A-5 through this complaint. 2) Hence, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing F.I.R in Crime No.111/2009 of III Town Police Station, Nizamabad. _______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J August 17, 2010 KSH