JOGANNAGARI SHIVA SHANKAR REDDY Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners/A-1 to A-5, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against them in Crime No.427 of 2017 of Medchel Police Station, which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 468, 471 and 506 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

(2.) The 2nd respondent/de facto complainant filed a private complaint before the XV-Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, at Medchel against the petitioners/A-1 to A-5 and the 3rd respondent herein (A-6) alleging that he belongs to Schedule Caste Community; that his father late P.Nagaiah was having ancestral agricultural land in Survey No.713/P admeasuring Ac.0.11gts, situated at Kistapur Village, Medchal Mandal and District and during his life time, he enjoyed the possession of the said land; that his father died long back leaving behind him and his brother Yadaiah, who inherited the aforesaid property and that since then they are in possession and enjoyment of the said land.

(3.) The 2nd respondent/de facto complainant further states that one late Jogannagary Veerareddy is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.1.35 gts., in Sy.No.716, situated at Kistapur Village, Medchal Mandal and District, which is adjacent neighbouring land of the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant. The said Jogannagari Veerareddy is the father of petitioner Nos.1 to 4/A1 to A-4, husband of the 5th petitioner/A-5 and friend of accused No.6 and that they approached the family of the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant and demanded them to sell the said property for a meager price, but the family of the 2nd respondent/ de facto complainant refused to sell the said property. It is further stated that due to deficient and uncertain rainfall, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant and his family did not cultivate the said land for some time and as there was heavy rainfall in July, 2016, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant and his brother went to the land for cultivation and at that point of the time, the 5th petitioner/A-5, her sons and 3rd respondent herein came there and threatened them saying that the said land was purchased by the husband of the 5th petitioner/A-5 by name late Veera Reddy long back, but they did not show any document to establish the same and thereafter, on 20.03.2017, the petitioners/A-1 to A-5 handed over a Xerox copy of the Sale Deed bearing Document No.8686 of 1990 dated 24.09.1990 registered at Sub Registrar Office of Medchel, which shows that the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant executed the registered sale deed in favour of the father of the petitioners/A-1 to A-4, in fact, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant never executed the said sale deed. Immediately thereafter, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant went to the Sub Registrar's Office, Medchel and obtained pahanies and on perusal of the same, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant realized that the petitioners/A-1 to A-4, 3rd respondent herein and the said J.Veerareddy, fraudulently forged the thumb impression of the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant and created the forged Registered Sale Deed. Out of the total land of Ac.0.11 gts., based on the forged document, the name of the father of the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant was abruptly deleted for the extent of Ac.0.10 gts., in Sy.No.713/Part in revenue records and further without serving any notice to the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant, the revenue officials mutated the remaining Ac.0-01 gts., in favour of the brother of the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant. It is also stated that the father of the petitioners/A-1 to A-4 by name J.Veera Reddy, died leaving behind him the petitioners/A-1 to A-5 as his legal heirs. With an intention to cheat the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant, all the petitioners/A-1 to A-5 along with A-6 had meticulously managed the revenue officials and dishonestly mutated their names for the extent of Ac.0.10 gts., in Sy.No.713/part, which belongs to the family of the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant and basing on that forged document, they are trying to interfere and dispossess the family of the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant from the said land and have been threatening the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant with dire consequences. It is also stated that on 30.07.2016, the 2nd respondent/ de facto complainant approached the police and requested them to take necessary action against the accused, but the police did not take any action stating that the matter is of civil in nature. On 19.04.2017, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant approached Truth Labs Forensic service to verify his thumb impression on the said sale deed, but the said Lab officials gave a report stating that the thumb impression of vendor No.6 in the alleged sale deed is not identical and both are different from the original thumb impression of the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant. As such, it is evident that the alleged sale deed is a forged one. After receiving the Lab report, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant again approached the Police, Medchel and requested to take necessary action against the accused, but the police did not take any action against them as they are very influential persons and have political background. As such, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant filed a private complaint before the XV-Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, who in turn referred the same to the Police for investigation and report. Basing on the said reference, the Police, Medchel, registered a case in Crime No.427 of 2017 against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 468, 471 and 506 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.