APHC010154732022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2621/2022 Between: Smt.nalluri Usha Rani and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. SIVA RAMA KRISHNA KOLLURU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, “Cr.P.C.”) has been filed by the Petitioners/ Accused Nos. 1 to 7, seeking quashment of the proceedings against them in C.C No.1095 of 2021 on the file of the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nuzvid. 2 Dr.VJPJ, CRLP.No.2621/2022 2. Heard Sri N. Subba Rao, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri K.Siva Rama Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioners. Notice is served on the respondent No.2 but they did not turn up. Heard Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that Petitioners have nothing to do with the offence and absolutely there are no allegations made against the Accused Nos. 1, 3 and 5. It is stated that though the crime was registered for the offence under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 506, 509, 120b r/w 34 IPC, 156(3) Cr.P.C and charge sheet is filed under Section 419 and 420 of IPC. Learned counsel would further submit that the respondent No.2 executed a registered sale deed in favour of A4 and A3 vide Document No.5748 of 2018 dated 22.01.2018 to an extent of Ac.4.48 cents in Sy.No.216 of Nekklam Village. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that mutation is also effected on 14.08.2018. The petitioners purchased the property by way of three sale deeds dated 22.01.2018. The present case has been lodged on 20.02.2019. There is a huge delay. It is alleged that against the petitioners that they did not pay the sale consideration. Learned counsel would further submit that it is a matter of civil nature and no civil suit is pending. Learned counsel finally submits that continuing criminal proceedings against the petitioners is mere abuse of process of law. It is not the case that the complainant has disputed their signatures. Having executed the registered sale deed, they have come up with 3 Dr.VJPJ, CRLP.No.2621/2022 a false plea that they have not received the sale consideration. Learned counsel finally prays for quashment of the case against the petitioners. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the respondents would submit that there are clear allegations made against the petitioners to attract the offence of cheating. There is verifiable material which requires investigation at the full length of trial is available in the record. After due investigation, the Police filed chargesheet in this matter. Learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 506, 509, 120b r/w 34 IPC, 156(3) Cr.P.C. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would further submit that registration could not be completed on the date of sale deed i.e., 22.01.2018. It was pending because the name of daughter of the complainant is not shown in the website. Pending registration, the petitioners preferred an appeal which was allowed, then only, the registration was done. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would further submit that behind the back of the complainant, registration was completed. They have not received the consideration. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would further submit that the delay is not suffice for quashment of the case at this stage. The delay is well explained by the complainant in their statement. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that this is not a fit case for quashment and prays for dismissal of the petition. 5. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material on record, the allegations made against the petitioners are to the effect that they 4 Dr.VJPJ, CRLP.No.2621/2022 have not paid sale consideration to the complainant. A fair look at the documents which were executed in favour of the petitioners in the complaint, the consideration was passed in cash and it was a past consideration. The details of which are not mentioned in the sale deed. It is also a fact that registration was not completed on the date of the presentation of the document before the authorities on 22.01.2018. Admittedly, the petitioners preferred an appeal pending registration and only after the appeal was allowed, registration was done. In the light of these circumstances, since disputed questions of fact are present in this matter, it is not a fit case for quashment. 6. In that view, the petition is dismissed. However, this Court makes it clear that this Court has not expressed anything touching the merits of the case and the petitioners are at liberty to raise their contentions before Trial Court in their defence and learned Trial Judge may consider them and take appropriatedecision according to law. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 07.01.2025 UPS 5 Dr.VJPJ, CRLP.No.2621/2022 31 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.2621 of 2022 Dt.07.01.2025 UPS