HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.384 OF 2009 DATE:12.08.2010 Between: Yeddu Martin Luther Sastry and 3 others. …… Petitioners. And: The State of AP., rep. by PP, High Court of AP., Hyderabad and another. …..Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.384 OF 2009 ORDER: 1. This petition is filed by A-1 to A-4 who are accused of offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 419, 467, 468, 471, 420 IPC in C.C.No.855 of 2008 on the file of V Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Guntur. Subject-matter of the dispute is registered lease deed dated 28.05.2001 executed by A-1 styling himself as President of Andhra Evangelical Lutheran Church (in short, the Church) in favour of A-2 and A-3 representing M/s. Indira Enterprises in respect of 500 sq. yards of site in T.S.No.84, Block-2, Ward No.2, Becker’s Compound, Main Road, Brodipet, Guntur. A-4 is stated to have purchased stamps for engrossing the said lease deed, in the capacity of Managing Director of M/s. Indira Enterprises. The said site of 500 sq. yards is part of a total extent of 1000 sq. yards. In respect of other extent of 500 sq. yards, one G. Emmanual executed a lease agreement in favour of A-2 and another for 49 years from 23.01.1994 to 23.01.2043. When regular lease deed was not executed in pursuance of the said agreement, A-2 and another filed suit for specific performance in O.S.No.48 of 1999 before the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur and obtained decree on 07.09.1999 in their favour, in pursuance of which decree that civil court executed registered lease deed on behalf of the Church and its President G. Emmanual and registered the same. That document was attested by A-3. 2. Even though it is alleged that A-1 had forged and fabricated the lease deed dated 28.05.2001, when the same was sent to Finger Print Bureau, C.I.D.,A.P., Hyderabad for comparison of thumb impression of A-1 contained in it, the expert gave opinion that it was in fact executed by A-1 alone. Thus, there is no forgery of the lease deed dated 28.05.2001. The allegation is that A-1 was not President of Church and that he is not competent to execute the lease deed and that procedure prescribed by Article-IX of the Constitution of the Church was not followed in execution of that lease deed. All these allegations are purely questions relating to civil dispute. Even if they are entertainable, such questions can be entertained by only a civil court not by a criminal court. Since there are regular registered lease deeds in respect of 1000 sq. yards of site, the lessees who are A-2, A-3 and another are at liberty to do construction work in the said site and excavate earth for the purpose of construction. Excavated earth cannot be dumped on the road. Therefore, they are at liberty to transport the same or to sell the same. This cannot be subject-matter of a criminal case. In case, A-1 is not President of the Church and has not followed Article-IX of the Constitution of the Church, it is a question bearing on validity of the lease deed. Validity of a document cannot be decided by a criminal court. Thus, on consideration of the entire allegations in the charge sheet, this Court is of the opinion that the dispute in this case is one which is purely of civil nature and it cannot be entertained by a criminal court much less by the police. 3. In the result, the petition is allowed quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.855 of 2008 on the file of V Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Guntur. __________________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU,J. Date:12.08.2010. Gk. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.384 OF 2009 Date:12.08.2010 Gk.