POONAMCHAND SISODIA Vs. K VEERAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 662 of 1996 on the file of the IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

(2.) The facts in giving rise to the filing of this petition are, briefly, as follows:- K. Veeraiah, the first respondent filed a private complaint against the petitioner for offences under Sections 417, 418, 419 and 420, IPC on 25-7-94 alleging that he was a tenant of Malgi bearing No. 5-8-54/3, corresponding to 5-8-54/9, belonging to the Hindi Prachar Sabha situated at L.N. Gupta Marg, Station Road, Nampally, Hyderabad. It is further alleged that the petitioner-accused filed a suit against one Laxman Das alleging that he was a tenant by filing a fake agreement and obtained ex parte decree against him and infact the first respondent/complainant was in possession of the said malgi by paying rents to Hindi Prachara Sabha and the petitioner/accused brought bailiff to the mulgi and the de facto complainant resisted the said execution and filed application before the concerned Court and the petitioner/accused failed to execute the decree. It is further alleged that the then Managing Trustee Sri T. Hayagreevachary acknowledged that the first respondent is a tenant and asked him to deposit the rents in the savings Bank account No. 1488 in Karnataka Bank, Nampally Hyderabad and obtained receipt from the agent by name P. Madava Rao and accordingly he was paying the rents. He was doing business in the name and style of M/s. Ideal Furnitures in the said premises. It is further alleged that the petitioner-accused herein knowing that the complainant is their lessee, requested the first respondent-complainant to vacate the premises in pursuance of the order and decree obtained in the name of Laxmandas and assured to induct him immediately thereafter into the possession of malgi and accordingly he vacated the malgi and subsequently the accused failed to re-deliver the possession of the malgi and cheated him. Thus he sought to punish the accused under the relevant provisions of law.

(3.) The said complaint was referred to the police and Police Station, Abids, after investigation submitted final report Dt. 31-8-1994 stating that the first respondent/complainant is the ex-tenant of Hindi Prachara Sabha and vacated the premises voluntarily and there were civil disputes between the first respondent-complainant and Hindi Prachara Sabha and the allegations are of civil nature and no criminal offence is made out against the petitioner-accused. The first respondent-complainant failed to produce any witness in his support.