HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD Criminal Petition No.5695 of 2009 Dated : 06.08.2009 Between : E.R.Surender and 5 others ….. Petitioners a n d The State of A.P. and another ….. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD Criminal Petition No.5695 of 2009 ORDER: Heard Sri T.Rajanikanth Reddy, leaned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri K.Dhananjayaa, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, who entered appearance for the first respondent. No notice is being ordered to the second respondent as the matter is being disposed of at the stage of admission. The first information report in crime No.38 of 2009 on the file of Nacharam Police Station was registered in pursuance of a private complaint filed by the second respondent herein before the Court of XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, which was referred to the Police for investigation and report under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The complainant no doubt alleges the dispute to be about the ownership and possession of open plot Nos.242 and 245 covered by Sy.No.4/1, of Mallapur Village, Nacharam Mandal, on which the accused Nos.1 and 2 were stated to have filed suits in O.S.Nos.924 and 925 of 2000 before the Principal Junior Civil Judge’ Court, Ranga Reddy District and the allegations of the complainant did not stop at that, but continued alleging that there were further incidents at his house on 02.11.2008, 10.11.2008, a week thereafter, 10 days thereafter and again followed by telephone calls to the complainant, etc. The complainant also alleges that on 10.11.2008, a sum of Rs.35,52,000/- was taken away from his house. The various acts alleged against the accused, therefore, are not purely confined only to the civil disputes between the parties and the remand case diary dated 08.03.2009 showing the progress in investigation by the statutory investigating agency referred to arrest of different accused and seizure of monies from them under confessional panchanamas. These circumstances may indicate that it cannot be said that ex facie there are absolutely no grounds to involve any of the accused in the alleged offence and therefore, the further continuation of the investigation can not be considered as an abuse of process of law. What the petitioners claim in this criminal petition is that the complaint discloses that the entire story is based upon the agreement of sale and the suits and that the ingredients of the alleged offence were not at all made out in the complaint. The denials of the petitioners about their involvement or their assertions about the absence of ingredients of the offence alleged do not appear to be exhibiting such strength as to persuade this Court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction in the criminal petition, which is available only in rarest of rare cases. As the question involved appears to be such as requiring investigation by the statutory investigating agency till its logical conclusion, the same cannot be interfered with at this premature stage. However, it is made clear that the further proceedings in investigation or before the trial Court shall be uninfluenced by any observations made in this order. Sri T.Rajanikanth Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that A.4 and A.5 were not at all arrested so far and that some relief may be granted in respect of the same. But, it is seen from the remand case diary dated 08.03.2009 that the other accused were arrested and were produced before the concerned Magistrate in accordance with law and there is no reason to believe that the fourth and fifth accused would face any prejudice to the detriment of their legal rights in case of their apprehension by the investigating agency and no positive direction can be given in this regard. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. ______________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J 6th August, 2009 SUR