ASHOK RAO EKBOTE Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is sole accused questioning the correctness of the charge sheet filed for the offences under Ss. 297, 427 and 447 of IPC, which is pending before the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad vide CC No.473 of 2019.

(2.) The 2nd respondent/defacto complainant filed written complaint on 17/9/2018 stating that he is the Inspector at Waqf Board. He along with Executive Officer and Surveyor inspected the premises of the petitioner/accused and found that waqf property which are two graves inside the compound wall of the bungalow which was in occupation of the petitioner, situated at Kachiguda Cross Roads had been dismantled to the level of the ground, for which reason the present complaint was filed. The police, Sultanbazar, on investigation found that there were two graves in the compound wall of the petitioner in 15.6 sq.yards and the same was published in the Gazette on 17/6/1982 at Sl.No.76 page No.89 under the Towliath of Waqf Board. According to the investigation, the State Waqf Board filed representation addressing the officials of Hyderabad Metro Rail, Metro Rail Bhavan to exempt the waqf property from acquisition and the graves cannot be demolished as per the Sharia Law. It was found that two graves in the compound wall were dismantled, for which reason, offence under Ss. 297, 427 and 447 of IPC were made out against the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Gazette dtd. 17/6/1982 whereby the notification was issued does not reflect the house number as 3/3/12/2, Kachiguda X Roads. When the house number is not given, the question of graves being removed and leveled to the ground cannot be accepted. Further, in the settlement Deed dtd. 16/7/1966, the property given to the petitioner shows the house number as 3/3/11, 12, 12/1 to 12/6 and 13, situated at Quthbiguda, which is different from the house number given by the prosecution. Further, there is no mention of any graves in the said compound, as such, the question of keeping two graves belonging to Muslim community by the petitioner, who belongs to Hindu community does not arise. Learned counsel finally submits that under Sec. 52(A) of the Waqf Act, 1995 which makes alienation of the Waqf property without sanction of the Board a punishable offence. Further, there is a bar for taking cognizance of any of the offence under Sec. 52-A unless authorized by the State Government. In support of his contention, he relied upon the decision of Kerala High Court in the case of Puthukkodi Abboobacker v. the Sub Inspector of Police, Valanchery Police Station in WP (C) No.19775 of 2015 (V), dtd. 14/10/2015.