IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.8162 of 2009 Between: Mohammed Subhan and others ..... PETITIONERS AND The State of A.P. and another ....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners : Counsel for the Respondents : The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.8162 OF 2009 ORDER: The present Criminal Petition is filed to quash Cr.No.108 of 2009 on the file of Sarangapur P.S., Karimnagar District, registered for the offences under Sections 447 and 506 read with 109 IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the complainant at about two years back went to Smt. Shashikala, A4, for the purpose of medical examination, while he was working as a sub-agent to send the intended persons to abroad; that prior to six months to the incident the complainant found the idols of Shakarudu, Lingam and Ganesh, while he was ploughing his land and built a temple to put the idols; and that he told A4 about these idols. Later on she called the complainant to Korutla and asked to dispose the idols by receiving money, for which the complainant refused; and that she visited the complainant’s house and requested him to plough his land once again and he refused to do so. On 19.08.2009 she sent A1 to A3 at about 02:00 PM, to the complainant’s house and found that he was not present at that time; that again at about 11:00 PM they visited his house and asked him to come with them as he was called by A4; and on that A1 took the knife (Kodavali) which was in front of the complainant’s house and threatened him with dire consequences, in case if he fails to follow them. When the complainant along with his family members raised hues and cries, LWs.5 and 6 went there and on seeing them, they ran away. 3. Basing on the said complaint, Cr.No.108 of 2009 was registered against the accused for the offences under Sections 447 and 506 read with 109 IPC. Challenging the same, the present criminal petition is filed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the de facto complainant borrowed Rs.2,00,000/- from A4 and that when she demanded to repay the amount, a false case is foisted against the petitioners; that A1 is the driver of A4 and A2 & A3 are the attesters to the promissory note and that no offence is made out against any of the accused as seen from the allegations. 5. There cannot be any dispute that the inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be exercised to prevent the abuse of process of court or to secure ends of justice or to give effect to the order passed under the Code. When the allegations of the complainant make out a prima facie case of trespass, the question of quashing the complaint does not arise. Whether the de facto compliant has borrowed the amount from A4 or not, is a question of fact which has to be decided during the course of trial of the case. It may be a fact that A2 and A3 are alleged to be the attesters of the promissory note said to have been executed by the de facto complainant in favour of A4, but at the same time a specific allegation is made against the present petitioners that A4 wanted pancha loha idols that were found in the field of the complainant, and for that purpose, she sent A1 to A3 to the house of de facto complainant so as to bring him forcibly. It is alleged that A1 to A3 trespassed in to the house of the de facto complainant and threatened him with a knife, when he raised hue and cry, the other intimates or the relatives reached to the scene of occurrence and on seeing them the accused ran away. Though A4 was not present at the time of offence, there was invocation to bring the de facto complainant forcibly. In view of the fact that a prima facie case is made out, the question of quashing the complaint does not arise. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _______________ K.C.BHANU, J October 6, 2009 MD