V. BALAJI RAO Vs. P.P., HYD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present criminal petition, under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C., is filed by the petitioner-accused seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No. 80 of 2015 on the file of the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Kothavalasa, registered for the offence punishable under Sec. 217 IPC.

(2.) Heard Sri K.Bhaskara Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused, and learned Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No. 1-State. None appeared for respondent No. 2-de facto complainant.

(3.) The petitioner-accused is working as Sub Inspector of Police, Vallampudi Police Station. The allegations made by respondent No. 2-de facto complainant in his complaint are that he is the absolute owner of land in an extent of Ac. 0.11 cents situated in survey No. 256/9 of Gudivada Revenue Village. The revenue authorities also issued adangal, pattadar passbook and title deed in his favour. Respondent No. 2 purchased the said land from one Medapureddi Sanni @ Sanni Babu under registered sale deed bearing document No. 1773/2013 dtd. 15/4/2013 and since then, he has been in possession and enjoyment of the subject land. While so, on 23/5/2013, one Chalumuri Padmavathi and Medapureddi Demudu colluded with each other and created fake sale deed in the name of Chalumuri Padmavathi at Jaggayyapeta Village with intention to grab the subject land. Having aware of ownership and possession of respondent No. 2, the said two persons, with dishonest intention, fraudulently created fake sale deed. Having come to know about the same, respondent No. 2 gave a report to the petitioner herein who was working as Sub Inspector of Police then, alleging offences under Ss. 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 474 read with Sec. 34 IPC. The grievance of respondent No. 2 is that the petitioner did not take any action against the said two persons which is contrary to the provisions of Sec. 154 (1) Cr.P.C. On the basis of the said allegations, respondent No. 2 filed a private complaint alleging offences under Ss. 217 and 166 IPC. The learned magistrate, after recording sworn statement of respondent No. 2, took cognizance of the offence under Sec. 217 IPC.