HANEEF MOINUDDIN SHAIK Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Petition is filed under Sec. 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for short "Cr.P.C.") to quash the proceedings in Crime.No.335 of 2020 of Mutyalareddypalli Town Police Station, Tirupati Urban District for the offence registered under Sec. 420 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short ("I.P.C").

(2.) The petitioners herein are accused Nos.1 and 2 and the 2ndrespondent herein is the de-facto complainant. The 2ndrespondent herein lodged a complaint alleging that the petitioners/A1 and A2 along with A3 induced her and her friend by name one M. Sujatha to purchase the land situated in an extent of 104.16 ankanams at plot No.130 in Sy.No.557 of Peruru Village, Tirupathi Rural and received an amount of Rs.5,00,000.00 from her and her friend and the petitioners/A1 and A2 executed agreement of sale dtd. 25/7/2020 by promising them that they will execute register sale deed for the said land and the balance amount of Rs.30,00,000.00 was agreed to be paid on or before 10/9/2020. But, the petitioners/A1 and A2 did not register the subject land in favour of the de-facto complainant and her friend, and registered the same to others. It is further alleged that petitioners/A1 and A2 neither return the amount nor registered the land to the de-facto complainant and her friend and cheated them by registering the plot in the name of others before the due date of execution of sale. Hence, the present FIR was filed.

(3.) The present petition is filed to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 on the ground that the allegations made in the complaint are so absurd, vague and the petitioner/accused Nos. 1 and 2 have been falsely implicated in the case. It is submitted that an agreement of sale dtd. 25/7/2020 was entered into between the petitioners/A1 and A2 and the 2ndrespondent and her friend, one M. Sujatha, to purchase the plot to an extent of 104.16 ankanams in Gazetted Officers, Co-operative Building Society in Sy.No.557 of Peruru Grama Panchayat for consideration of Rs.35,00,000.00 and paid 5,00,000/- as advance on the very same day and agreed to pay the balance of sale consideration within one and half month i.e., on or before 10/9/2020. It is further submitted that, the de-facto complainant and her friend failed to pay the balance of consideration within the stipulated time frame under the agreement. According to the agreement if the balance amount is not paid within the stipulated time, the same will be forfeited. It is further submitted that the complaint does not disclose that the petitioners had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of entering into the agreement, and in the absence of any such culpable intention, the filing of a complaint under Sec. 420 read with Sec. 34 of the IPC is not maintainable. Additionally, the 2ndrespondent herein and her friend already filed a suit vide O.S.No.2 of 2021 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Tirupathi, seeking specific performance of the agreement of sale. The present case is filed only with the sole intention of settling a civil dispute. Hence, prays to allow the petition.