THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRLP.MP.No. 8958 of 2010 And CRIMINAL PETITION No.2622 of 2007 Date of Order:17.02.2011 Between: K.Anitha and another ..Petitioners and The State of A.P., rep. By its Sub Inspector of Police and another ..Respondents The Court made the following Order: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CRLP.MP.No. 8958 of 2010 And CRIMINAL PETITION No.2622 of 2007 ORDER :- This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the investigation in F.I.R.No.99 of 2007 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 r/w Section 34 and 149 IPC pending on the file of Saidabad Police Station, was dismissed for default on 09.09.2010 for non appearance of the counsel. In view of the application filed in Crl.P.M.P.No.8958 of 2010, the dismissal order is recalled and the Crl.P.MP is ordered. Heard the matter on merits. Sri Vedula Venkata Ramana, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners contends that the allegations made in the complaint do not constitute any criminal offence. If the decree passed by the civil court is vitiated by fraud or any other factum, the remedy of the complainant is either to file an appeal against the decree or file a separate suit for declaration that the decree was obtained by fraud and, therefore, the initiation of the criminal proceedings alleging that the ex parte decree is obtained on a forged document is nothing but an abuse of process of law. Complainant having filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree passed in the suit, he resortedly filed the above complaint only to coerce the petitioners to settle the matter and, therefore, the same is liable to be quashed. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents contends that the decree was obtained on the forged documents, which constitute a criminal offence and the police have to investigate the case and hence, the same cannot be quashed at the threshold. The complaint allegations discloses that petitioner No.1-A1 forged the signatures of the 1st complainant, his wife and sons on the agreement of sale, dated 29.03.1995, Receipts and authorisation letter, and based on the same he filed the suit before II Additional Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad in the year 1996. The accused also gave a false evidence apart from fabricating the documents by forgery for the purpose of cheating in collusion with her father-accused No.2 and got the sale deed executed through the Hon’ble Court basing on the ex parte decree which came to the complainant’s knowledge only in the month of June, 2006, when A3 and A4 approached for letting the complainant’s house in the first floor for rent. When the complainant demanded them for monthly rent, they have shown to him the sale deed, dated 22.06.2006, stating that they have purchased it from accused No.1 under a registered sale deed, dated 22.06.2006. Immediately, the complainant applied for certified copies of the suit papers and lodged the above complaint before the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, City Criminal Courts, Hyderabad. On the Magistrate referring the matter to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., the police registered the crime for the offences as aforementioned. The complaint allegations that the agreement of sale, receipts and authorisation letter are forged and based on the said documents, the suit has been filed and an ex parte decree was passed, clearly constitute an offence which necessarily have to be investigated by the police. The possible defences available to the petitioners viz., the suit summons were served on the respondent/complainant and he has not chosen to contest nor put any defence opposing the claim of the accused etc., are matters which can be taken into consideration by the police during the course of investigation before filing the charge sheet on the alleged offences. Further, it is well settled that though civil remedy is available to the parties seeking to set aside the ex parte decree, it may also give raise to a criminal action depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. It is too early to presume that the complaint allegations as referred to above are false which do not require any investigation by the police except resorting to the civil remedy available to the complainant. In view of the same, it is not a fit case where this court can quash the proceedings at the threshold. The Criminal Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. On petitioners appearing before the police station and co-operating with the investigation, the Station House Officer shall complete the investigation and file the appropriate report. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J February 17, 2011 Lmv