THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.2673 & 2237 OF 2010 COMMON ORDER: 1 These two petitions are filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Cr.No.46 of 2010 on the file of II Town P.S. Rajahmundry and Cr.No.22 of 2010 on the file of Station House Officer, Amalapuram in East Godavari Districtm respectively registered for the alleged offences punishable under sections 420 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC. Since petitioner in both these petitions is one and the same, and since the allegations levelled against the petitioner are based upon a common cause of action, these two petitions are disposed of by way of this common order. 2 The petitioner is the General Secretary of All India ING Vysya Bank Employees Union and he is working as Clerk in ING Vysya Bank at Bangalore. The de facto complainants in both the cases are employees of the said Bank. ESVEE Constructions, Bangalore promoted a scheme for providing house sites to ING Vysya Bank Employees on the request of Bank Employees Union and that the first respondents in both the petitions joined as Members in the said scheme and paid various amounts to ESVEE Constructions, Bangalore and the said payments were acknowledged by the said company and there is no dispute in respect of the said payments. Alleging that the petitioner collected huge amounts from ING Vysya Bank Employees with a view to cheat them, the first respondents in both the cases gave report to the police. 3 The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that even as per the allegations in the report given to the police by the first respondent in both the cases they made all the payments to ESVEE Constructions, Bangalore and that they did not pay even a single rupee to the petitioner and in the absence of the petitioner receiving any amount from the respondents the question of the petitioner committing the offences punishable under sections 420 and 506 of IPC would never arise. It is further stated that in the circular letter given by the Union to all the ING Vysya Bank Employees, the petitioner had made it clear that the Union is only a facilitator and that all payments have to be made by the bank employees to ESVEE constructions by way of demand drafts only. In this context, the learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this court with same set of facts and allegations another Crime was registered against the petitioner as against which the petitioner preferred Criminal Petition No. 2050 of 2010 which was allowed by this Court by a common order dated 13.04.2010 in CRl.P.Nos.2017 & 2050 of 2010 and these two petitions are also squarely covered by the common order passed in those petitions. 4 Having regard to the admitted facts it is prima facie evident that the petitioner received no part of the payments from the respondents. Thus, even if the facts stated by the first respondents in their respective reports given to the police are accepted to be true, those facts do not prima facie make out any offence punishable under section 420 of IPC. 5 Further, in so far as the offence punishable under section 506 of IPC is concerned, the petitioner is resident of Bangalore whereas the respondents are residents of Rajahmundry and Amalapuram in East Godavari District of Andhra Pradesh. It is not stated as to by what means and mode the petitioner had intimidated the respondents. 6 As can be seen from the allegations made in the report, the dispute between the respondents and the said ESVEE Constructions is purely civil dispute regarding plots, sale consideration therefor and registration of plots in the name of the respondents. So it will not clothe the complainants with a right to proceed under criminal law against the petitioner. Same was the finding of this court in Crl.P.Nos.2017 & 2050 of 2010 also. 7 For the above discussion, this court is of the view that there are no merits in the FIRs lodged by the respondents/complainants and therefore, the same are liable to be set aside. 8 In the result, both the petitions are allowed and the proceedings in Cr.No.46 of 2010 on the file of Station House Officer, II Town Police Station (L&O) Rajahmundry and Cr.No.22 of 2010 on the file of Station House Officer, Amalapuram Town Police station are hereby quashed. -------------- 06.07.2010 Kvsn