M RAMESH BABU Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Inasmuch as these petitions emanate from the same proceedings in P.R.C.No. 24 of 2003 on the file of XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, and as similar questions of law and fact are involved, they can be disposed of together.

(2.) The second respondent in all these petitions is the ate facto complainant who filed the criminal complaint alleging the offences punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for brevity 'the IPC') and Sessions 3(1) (viii), (ix), (x) and 3(2) (v) and (vii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for brevity 'the Act') qua A-1, A-4 to A-7, A-2 and A-3 in the case, who are the petitioners respectively in these petitions.

(3.) The facts lie in a narrow compass, The de facto complainant belongs to the Scheduled Caste and he is a retired Government servant. According to the complainant, the house bearing No. 1 -1 -258/ 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 10/1 situate at main road, Chikkadapally, is a joint family property of the complainant and his brothers by name Harikishan and Pandu Reddy and the complainant used to manage the same. The said property consists of shops and residential portions. The deceased in this case was the son of Harikishan. The said Harikishan who was in the occupation of the house after having vacated the same was staying outside. He sold the malgies bearing No. 1 -1 -258/7 to 10 and 10/1 and the residential house to the accused 4 to 6 in the year 1991. In connection with the said properties, the complainant filed a civil suit in O.S.No. 118/1985 for declaration on the file of the I Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. He also filed two more suits in O.S.Nos. 888/1994 and 890/1994. On the other hand, A-5 filed two suits in O.S.Nos. 889/1994 and 891/ 1994. Under a common Judgment dated 20-11 -1996, suits in O.S.No. 118/1985, 888/ 1994 and 890/1994 were decreed with costs and suits filed by A-5 in O.S.No. 889/1994 and 891/1994 were dismissed.