P.BHASKAR RAO Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the petitioners-A1 and A2 under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in CC No.57 of 2013 on the file of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam.

(2.) The respondent No.2 lodged a report before the Station House Officer, Khammam Police Station on 02.03.2012 at 1.00 PM stating that the petitioner No.1 was the customer of the Bank and he was having current account bearing No.630605108811 and had requested them to provide a loan for his business expansion. On that, they sanctioned an over draft facility of 1.77 million based upon a third party security under Agriculture credit line facility in September, 2005 and the petitioner No.1 submitted required documents. Considering the documents as true and genuine, the over draft facility was sanctioned and disbursed in favour of the petitioner No.1. The petitioner No.1 executed loan application form, agreement and other documents and the petitioner-A2, wife of petitioner No.1, was the guarantor for the said overdraft facility obtained by the petitioner No.1. The guarantor submitted property documents of a vacant land measuring 5058 sq.mtrs/Ac.1.20 guntas, situated at Sy.No.278 of Velugumatla village, Gollagudem Grampanchayat, Khammam District, as collateral security for the overdraft facility. After receipt of the overdraft facility, the borrower did not maintain the financial discipline and became a non-performing asset, due to which they initiated to take symbolic possession of the collateral property as per SARFAESI Act, even though they could not identify the mortgaged property. On internal verification, they found that the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 created fictitious property documents and arranged the same as collateral security to procure the overdraft facility. The property provided by the customer was found to be Inam land of Lord Anjaneya Swamy and the same was confirmed by Tahsildar, Khammam urban which also established that the property documents like Patta Passbook and Pahani submitted by the customer were fabricated. The same was confirmed with the letter issued by the Tahsildar and the Pahani copy obtained by them. The property shown as security was not in existence. On enquiry with the petitioner No.1, he agreed the fraud and admitted that there was no such property in existence and the Patta Pass book and Pahani were created by one of his business friend, by name, Mujeeb and out of ignorance he submitted them as collateral security post registration of gift deed in favour of his wife-petitioner No.2. Basing on the said complaint, Crime No.23 of 2012 was registered by the police under Sec. 468 read with 420 IPC and after investigation, filed charge sheet against the petitioners 1 and 2 for the above offences.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.