THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY Crl.P.No.5242/2007 Dt.5-8-2010 Surekha Reddy ..Petitioner/accused V. 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., through P.S.II Town, Mahabubnagar and another ..Respondents The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY Crl.P.No.5242/2007 ORAL ORDER This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner/accused in CC No.218/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-cum-Special Mobile Court, at Mahabubnagar. The second respondent, who is defacto- complainant, lodged a complaint dt. 9-9- 2006 before the Superintendent of Police, Mahabubnagar stating that he is one of the share holders of H.No.1-4-88 and open place situated at New Town, Mahabubnagar; that they filed OS No.35/1993 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Mahabubnagar for partition of the said house against the husband of the petitioner herein and others; that suit was decreed allotting a share in the property and the matter is pending for passing of a final decree; that during the pendency of the final proceedings, the petitioner, who is the wife of S. Ravinder Reddy along with 30 to 40 persons have illegally trespassed into the said house and demolished majority portion of the said house with the help of proclainer and caused loss to the tune of more than Rs.10,00,000/-; that after demolition, they removed various wooden material worth more than Rs.1,00,000/- and she committed theft of the said property. On forwarding the said complaint, Sub-Inspector of Police, II Town Police Station, Mahabubnagar registered the same as in Cr.No.190/1996 under Sections 447 and 427 IPC and filed charge sheet after completion of investigation. It is not disputed that the petitioner’s husband is a joint owner of the house. The defacto-complainant filed suit, OS No.35/1993 for partition, in which a preliminary decree was passed. The complaint allegations taken at its face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the offences alleged, namely, 447 and 427 IPC as long as she was not in exclusive possession of the joint family property. Further, the property belongs to the joint family and possession of one co-sharer of joint family would be deemed to be possession of other co-sharers. In view of the same, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner is nothing but abuse of process and same are liable to be quashed. The Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings initiated against the petitioner/accused in CC No.218/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-cum- Special Mobile Court at Mahabubnagar are quashed. ______________ A.GOPAL REDDY,J Dt.5-8-2010 kmr