IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2749 OF 2008 Between: Budati Lakshmi Narayana ..... PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and another ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2749 OF 2008 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 in C.C.No.230 of 2007 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chilakaluripet, Guntur District. 2. The allegations in the complaint would go to show that respondent No.1 registered a case as Crime No.237 of 2006 for the offences under Sections 420 and 468 I.P.C. against the petitioner, basing on the complaint given by respondent No.2. The allegation of respondent No.2 is that on 27.06.2001, the petitioner along with his mother and brother approached him for a loan of Rs.16,50,000/- by depositing registered sale deeds and basing upon those documents the bank granted loan and later it came to know that the documents are spurious. It is further alleged that while shifting the bank from Pasumarru to Chilakaluripet, the petitioner has lifted the original documents and placed the fake documents in place of the original documents and further alleged that the petitioner has caused monitory loss to the bank to a tune of Rs.24,00,000/-. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the names of other accused were deleted from the charge sheet and therefore, it shows that the petitioner has not committed the offence; that the allegations in the complaint do not disclose the prima facie offence under Section 420 I.P.C. and at best they would give rise to a civil cause of action only and hence, he prays to quash the proceedings. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 contended that the allegations in the charge sheet made out a prima facie case for the offences alleged and there are no grounds to quash the proceedings. 5. 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. If the allegations in the charge sheet do not made out a prima facie case for the offence alleged, then only the question of quashing the charge sheet arises. 6. It is alleged that at the request of Budati Haribabu and Budati Pushpavathi, to sanction loan of Rs.16,50,000/- to the accused for the construction of a commercial complex, the loan was sanctioned and consequently the accused have deposited the registered sale deed bearing No.3340/2000, dated 28.08.2000, on 03.07.2001, for creation of equitable mortgage as security to the bank loan to release the amount. Subsequently, the borrowers failed to repay the amount as per schedule. The bank officials obtained the concerned documents so as to take appropriate action against the borrowers and came to know that the title deed deposited by the accused on 03.07.2001 is a spurious document. Therefore, prima facie the petitioner cheated the bank by pledging a spurious document. It is the petitioner who was maintaining the bank transactions. It is also alleged that the petitioner alone was responsible for substituting the fake documents with the originals at the time of shifting of the bank and therefore, caused loss to the bank. Hence, a prima facie case for the offences alleged is made out and so, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. It is made clear that observation, if any, made is only for the purpose of disposal of this case and uninfluenced by any observation in this order, the trial Court shall proceed with the case in accordance with law. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J July 29, 2010 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2749 OF 2008 July 29, 2010