MOHD. LAYAQ ALI Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is accused in C.C.No.64 of 2017 on the file of the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, filed this Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings initiated against him in the above C.C.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the 2nd respondent herein filed a private complaint against the petitioner/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of I.P.C before the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, who referred the same to the police, Kanchanbagh Police Station, Hyderabad, under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C., for investigation and report. The Kanchanbagh Police registered a case in Crime No.173 of 2016 against the petitioner/accused under the aforesaid Sections of law. After due investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the petitioner/accused, which was taken cognizance as C.C.No.64 of 2017 and the same is pending on the file of the VII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

(3.) The allegations in the charge sheet are that the petitioner/accused had approached the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant, in the month of November, 2015, at his residence and made him to believe that he had good influence in the Minorities Welfare Department and suggested him to avail loan from the said Department. Believing the version of the petitioner/accused, the 2nd respondent/ de facto complainant had handed over the required documents and also paid an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards processing fees. The petitioner/accused promised that he will look after for sanction of loan of Rs.2,50,000/- and also informed that a bank account has to be opened in his name, as the loan amount and subsidy amount will be transferred to the said bank account. By saying so, the petitioner/accused had obtained his signatures on different papers, some blank papers and on blank cheque. In the month of January, 2016, the petitioner/accused informed him that his loan application has been approved and he will get the loan amount from bank and also subsidy. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant visited the bank and, on his enquiry, it revealed that the loan amount was already credited to his bank account and the Minority Finance Corporation has also given a subsidy amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and that the same has been credited to his account. But, the entire amount of Rs.2,50,000/- has been withdrawn from the bank by the petitioner/accused by presenting the cheque, which was collected from the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant earlier. When the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant tried to call the petitioner/accused, he switched off his phone and absconding.