THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2232 OF 2009 ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “Cr.P.C.”), is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/A2, A3, A4, A7 and A8 in Crime No.369 of 2008, dated 07.07.2008 of I Town Police Station, Vijayawada, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 423 and 471 I.P.C. 2. Petitioners herein are A2, A3, A4, A7 and A8. Respondent No.2 herein is the complainant. 3. It is alleged in the private complaint that A5 was the owner of the property bearing D.No.12-11-54 to 59 to an extent of 2855 square yards. A5 prepared to sell the said property along with all the structures raised by him. Respondent No.2/complainant decided to purchase the same and the bargain was settled between A5 and the complainant for Rs.3,339/- per square yard. A5 received advance sale consideration of Rs.5,45,499/-. Subsequently, also on various dates the complainant made part payments to A5. Thereafter, the complainant along with his friends and family members formed a firm under the name and style of Sri Sai Baba Builders, with an intention to construct a Business Complex in the said site of 2855 square yards. On 04.11.1991, A5 received an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- and on the same day executed an agreement of sale in favour of M/s. Sri Sai Baba Builders, Vijayawada. Thereafter, when the complainant demanded A5 to execute a registered sale deed, after receiving the balance sale consideration, A5 informed that the original title deeds were with Andhra Bank, Gudur, Nellore District, under equitable mortgage and the said loan is to be cleared off out of the balance sale consideration and then only he can execute and register the sale deed, and thereafter deliver the original title deeds. On such information, the complainant approached the General Manager, Andhra Bank, Gudur, Nellore District, for negotiations for the discharge of the said equitable mortgage; got settled the said loan account; made payments and got cleared the loan account on behalf of A5. By 04.09.1995, the complainant paid an amount of Rs.1,31,99,999/- to A5 and in turn A5 delivered the possession of the said property to the complainant. A7, who was the broker to the complainant, represented that he will get a regular sale deed executed by A5 and A6 in favour of the complainant and received the agreement of sale, dated 04.11.1991 from the complainant. But, A7 with a fraudulent intention to deceive the complainant colluded with A1 to A4 and handed over the said agreement of sale to them for unlawful gain from them. Thus, A7 committed breach of trust against the complainant. The said fact is established through the evidence of A1 to A4 when they produced the said agreement of sale before the Court in Original Suit Nos.544 of 1995 and batch, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, filed by the complainant against the accused for specific performance and permanent injunction. It is further alleged that during the course of trial, the accused produced a fax letter dated 04.11.2001 addressed by A5 from United States of America to A6 intimating his unreadiness to come to India due to non-availability of accommodation in flights till March, 2002. Later A1 to A4 produced an agreement of sale dated 16.08.1991 in the said suits filed by the complainant. During the course of investigation, the Sub-Registrar Vijayawada stated to police that the said stamp papers on which the agreement of sale dated 16.08.1991 was executed were not sold by the stamp vendor, as per the N.J. Stamp Sales Register of the said Stamp Vendor. Hence, the complaint. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the complaint was lodged on 23.06.2008; that there is no allegation of whatsoever against petitioner No.5/A8, in view of the fact that she is not a party to any of the civil suits and hence, he prays to quash the proceedings. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.2 contended that the allegations are levelled against all the accused, who have cheated the complainant and created agreement of sale deed dated 16.08.1991; that as a prima facie case is made out, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings, and hence, he prays to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 6. Inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked when there is an abuse of process of Court or to secure ends of justice or to give effect to the orders passed under the Code. The allegations in the complaint, if taken as true or correct at this stage, made out a prima facie case of the offences alleged, then the question of quashing the complaint does not arise. 7. It is not in dispute before this Court that petitioner No.1/A2 died during pendency of the Criminal Petition. Therefore, continuation of the proceedings against petitioner No.1/A.2 is nothing but abuse of process of Court. Insofar as petitioner No.5/A8 is concerned, there is no allegation with reference to any offences punishable under law. Therefore, continuation of proceedings against petitioner No.5 is nothing but abuse of process of Court. Hence, the proceedings against petitioner Nos.1 and 5/A2 and A8 are liable to be quashed. 8. Insofar as the other accused are concerned, it is specifically alleged that the agreement of sale deed dated 16.08.1991 was fabricated and produced before the civil Court and that petitioner No.4/A7 with a fraudulent motive, in order to deceive the complainant, intentionally colluded with A1 to A4 for unlawful gain. Therefore, the allegations in the complaint made out a prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 423 and 471 I.P.C. against petitioner Nos.2 to 4/A.3, A.4 and A.7. Hence, the question of quashing the proceedings against petitioner Nos.2 to 4/A3, A4 & A7 does not arise. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed quashing the proceedings only against petitioner Nos.1 and 5/A2 and A8. However, it is made clear that the police shall proceed with the investigation insofar as other petitioners are concerned. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J August 12, 2010 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWELVETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2232 OF 2009 Between: Sr. Maria Martina and others ..... PETITIONERS AND State of Andhra Pradesh and another ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: 1) 27.8.2010 Crl.MP No.7930 of 2010 Heard both sides. This petition is filed stating that petitioner No.1/A.2 died during pendency of this Criminal Petition and so to quash the impugned proceedings against him. Hence, the petition is ordered and the impugned proceedings against petitioner no.1/A.2 are quashed as died. Petition is, accordingly, ordered. For being mentioned: As seen from the cause title, the petitioner nos.1 to 3, who are A.2 to A.4, are wrongly shown as A.1 to A.3. So, cause title is permitted to be corrected accordingly. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2232 OF 2009 August 12, 2010