HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.5277 of 2​008 ORDER: The petitioners in this petition are shown as accused in Crime No.52 of 2008of Thimmapuram Police Station, Kakinada, East Godavari District. They filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) to quash the proceedings against them in the said FIR. 2. Counsel for the second respondent is absent. The contents of the FIR show that the de facto complainant purchased an extent of Ac.0-82 cents in Sy.No.36/1 and another extent of Ac.0-53 cents in Sy.No.36/2 of P.Venkatapuram village in an auction sale conducted by the Court of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge in E.P.No.539 of 2004. It is also the case of the de facto complainant that he was put in possession of the said property by the bailiff of that Court on 30.07.2008. The complaint of the de facto complainant is that when he was in possession of the said property and was cultivating it, all the petitioners herein without any manner of right came to the said property/land and trespassed upon the same and committed some mischief by threatening his watchman. This incident is said to have occurred on 05.08.2008. 3. The plea of the petitioners is that the first petitioner purchased an extent of Ac.0-50 cents in Sy.No.36/1A of P.Venkatapuram village from the judgment debtor much prior to the attachment of the property in auction and this Ac.0-50 cents was part of the Ac.0-82 cents in Sy.No.36/1. The first petitioner says that he purchased this land i.e. his extent of Ac.0-50 cents through a sale deed dated 20.06.1994 while the property of Ac.0- 82 cents is said to have been attached on 16.07.1994 which is subsequent to this purchase. They therefore say that they were in possession of the extent of Ac.0-50 cents purchased by the first petitioner and consequently no question of any offence of trespass or mischief would arise. It is on this ground petitioners are seeking quashment of the proceedings in the FIR. The petitioners 2 and 3 are stated to be sons and petitioners 4 to 6 are stated to be connected to or related to the first petitioner. 4. It is thus clear that the first petitioner is claiming the property in question as a purchaser prior to its attachment. It should however be noted that this extent of Ac.0-50 cents claimed by the first petitioner is stated to be part of Ac.0-82 cents in Sy.No.36/1. It is not clear whether the offences alleged took place with regard to the entire extent of Acs.1-32 cents or only a part of it. It may also be noted that just because of an FIR is registered it does not mean that it should end up in a charge sheet. It is open for the police to investigate into the matter and reach their conclusion either to close the case or to file a charge sheet. It is always open for the petitioners to put forward their pleas before the concerned investigating officer or his superior and show that they are not guilty of any offences and as and when petitioners make their pleas the investigating officer shall consider the same and reach his conclusion in the matter. 5. With the above observations this criminal petition is disposed of. It is brought to my notice that all the petitioners are on bail and this is recorded and it shall be always open for them to approach the investigating officer for the above pleas. ______________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J 1st April 2011 CVRK