MIRAPAKAYALA RAJESH Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/accused, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against him in C.C.No.543 of 2016 on the file of the VI-Metropolitan Magistrate at Medchal, Cyberabad. A charge sheet came to be filed against the petitioner/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 of I.P.C.

(2.) The facts, in issue, are as under: The 2nd respondent/complainant filed a private complaint against the petitioner/accused before the VI-Metropolitan Magistrate at Medchal, Cyberabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 of I.P.C., which was referred to the police under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C . for investigation and report. Basing on the said reference, the Police, Jeedimetla Police Station, registered a case in Crime No.157 of 2016 against the accused and took up investigation. After completion of investigation, the police filed charge sheet and the concerned Court has taken cognizance of the aforesaid offences and thereafter the same was numbered as C.C.No.543 of 2016.

(3.) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the petitioner/accused had approached the 2nd respondent/ complainant and offered to sell his house bearing H.No.3-43, situated at Quthbullapur Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, for a sale consideration of Rs.38,00,000/-. The 2nd respondent/complainant agreed to purchase the same and paid an advance of Rs.1,00,000/- on 16.03.2013 and thereafter he made part payments of Rs.5,00,000/- on 25.03.2013, Rs.66,000/- on 08.05.2013, Rs.1,34,000/- on 23.05.2013. In total, the 2nd respondent/complainant paid Rs.8,00,000/- to the petitioner/accused. After receiving the said amount, the petitioner/accused had entered into an agreement of sale, dated 23.05.2013, agreeing to receive the balance sale consideration of Rs.30,00,000/- at the time of registration. Fifteen days thereafter, the 2nd respondent/complainant paid Rs.7,00,000/- to the petitioner/accused and agreed to pay the balance amount within 30 days. The 2nd respondent/ complainant had applied for sanction of home loan for the purpose of paying balance sale consideration and the same was approved by Shriram Housing Finance. Immediately, the 2nd respondent/ complainant contacted the petitioner/accused and informed that he is ready to pay the balance sale consideration and demanded the petitioner/accused to execute registered sale deed, but the petitioner/accused had dodged the matter on one pretext or the other and intentionally postponed the registration and also demanded to pay some more amount, but the 2nd respondent/complainant did not agree for the same and demanded the petitioner/accused either to register the house in his favour or pay back the amount, upon which the petitioner/accused agreed to pay back the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- and got issued cheque bearing No.000024, dated 03.11.2016 drawn on Bank of India, Ameerpet Branch, which was dishonoured due to "account closed" and the same was informed to the petitioner/accused, for which he requested the 2nd respondent/ complainant to give some more time. Thereafter, in the month of February, 2015, the 2nd respondent/ complainant went to the house of the petitioner/accused and demanded him to perform his contractual obligation by accepting the balance sale consideration, but the petitioner/accused refused to register the same and agreed to pay back the amount of Rs.15.00 lakhs with interest from 23.05.2013 and issued two post dated cheques bearing Nos. 278646 and 278647, dated 10.02.2015 and 25.02.2015, each for Rs.8.00 lakhs, drawn on Oriental Bank of Commerce, Balanagar Branch. Believing the version of the petitioner/accused, the 2nd respondent/complainant had deposited the said cheques, in ICICI Bank, Quthbullapur Branch, but the same were dishonoured due to "Account closed". Thus, with an ill motive, the petitioner/ accused had contacted the 2nd respondent/complainant, induced him to enter into an agreement of sale, and thereafter cheated him by misusing his hard earned money and issued cheques towards discharge of his legally enforceable liability knowing well that the account was closed and thereby caused loss to the 2nd respondent/complainant. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner/accused, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the 1st respondent/State, learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent/complainant and perused the record.