HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.8846 of 2008 O R D E R: The petitioner is accused of offence punishable under Sections 420 and 506 IPC. The petitioner is owner of lands of Ac.1.39 guntas in S.No.80 and Ac.0-26 guntas in S.No.81/part in Chennavelly village. It is alleged that the petitioner agreed to sell the lands to the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant for Rs.3,50,000/- and received advance of Rs.15,000/- on 08.10.2005 and that remaining consideration has to be paid after getting the land measured and at the time of registration and that while so the petitioner sold the land to one Uppala Vanaja on 23.11.2008 by way of registered sale deed. It is further alleged that when the 2nd respondent questioned the petitioner about the same, the petitioner requested for some time for settling the matter and that on 10.09.2007 the petitioner and his associates threatened the 2nd respondent with dire consequences if he asked for registration of sale deed. Basic transaction between the parties is a contractual one. Out of huge agreed sale consideration, the petitioner is stated to have received only a paultry sum of Rs.15,000/-. It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that neither in F.I.R. nor in the charge sheet and documents filed along with the charge sheet, there is any allegation to the effect that the petitioner had dishonest intention prior to inception of the transaction on 08.10.2005. In the absence of any such allegation, mere second sale of the property in favour of the third party, cannot be concluded as an act of cheating on the part of the petitioner. It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that since the 2nd respondent did not come forward to complete the transaction, the petitioner had to sell the lands to the third party. On total consideration of facts of this case, I am of the opinion that the case is one which is predominantly of civil nature and remedy of the 2nd respondent is to approach the Civil Court for appropriate remedies. I do not find any element of criminality in this case. In the result, the petition is allowed quashing proceedings in C.C.No.95 of 2008 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Jadcherla, Mahabubnagar District. ____________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU,J Dt. 17th November, 2011. PNV