K AMARAVANI Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused in First Information Report (FIR) in Crime No. 318 of 2014 on the file of Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad seeks for the quashment of the same. The complaint was lodged by the 2nd respondent. The petitioner allegedly committed the offences under Sections 447, 427 and 506 IPC and under Sections 4 and 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982. The petitioner, along with others filed O.S. No. 1319 of 2013 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District against the 2nd respondent and others. The petitioner and other plaintiffs were granted ad interim injunction. Admittedly, the same was vacated by the Trial Court. An appeal is pending before this Court.

(2.) AN Agreement of Sale cum General Power of Attorney was executed by 13 persons in favour of the 2nd respondent on 13 -8 -1998. Similarly, another Agreement of Sale cum General Power of Attorney was executed on the same day by 8 persons in favour of the 2nd respondent albeit the document arrayed 9 persons as vendors. Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that neither of the Agreements of Sale cum General Power of Attorney disclosed the source of the title of the vendors.

(3.) IN Fayaz Ahmed @ Hasan v. State of A.P. : 2014 (2) ALT (Crl.) 192 (A.P.) relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it was noticed: