P. MADHAVI Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in Criminal Petition No.9612 of 2015 is A12 and the petitioners in Criminal Petition No.9994 of 2015 are A2 to A11 of CC.No.113 of 2015 on the file of I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Khammam, which was taken cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468, 471 r/w. 34 IPC. Same is the outcome of the report of the 2nd respondent /de facto complainant, dated 04.05.2013, to the Inspector of Police, II Town, Khammam, which reads,

(2.) The list of the 28 members furnished along with the report and it is there from registered as Cr.No.188/2013 by the Police for the offences supra. The police after investigation filed charge sheet stating requisition sent to Registrar of Societies, Khammam, to furnish the registration documents of Sri Sai Durga Balaji Health and Educational Welfare Society No.265/2006 and Sri Sri Chinna Jiyer Swami Educational Society No.5800/1997 till date from 26.02.2007 and collected all attested documents from Registrar of Societies, Khammam and also bank transaction statement of de facto complainant and his wife and xerox copies of their passports and from the statements of LWs 1 to 6, including the de facto complainant and his wife, with others by name Y.V.Shekaram, U.A.Prasad, P.Bharathi, K.Chamundeswar Rao shows involvement of A12- Pulipati Madhavi, W/o.A1-Pulipati Prasad also besides some of the fake members of the society in about 28, other than A3, A6 to A10, A14 to A17, A19, A21 to A26 whose names with permission of SDPO deleted and de facto complainant was the Chairman and President of the Sri Sai Dhurga Balaji Health and Educational Welfare Society and A1 acted as Secretary and A12, wife of A1, as Vice President. The de facto complainant sent Rs.30 lakhs from USA to the Account No.3320303000001 on 12.09.2012 and again Rs.20 lakhs on 24.08.2012 through cheque bearing No.295120 for development of the society and among that, Rs.25 lakhs withdrawn by A1 and instead of taking signature of President and Treasurer, drawn the amounts and used for his own and having noticed the misappropriation done by A1, the society President and Treasurer stopped bank transactions. Then A1 created false names of members and false resolutions of society meetings and constituted 28 members more than nine fake and created resolutions of General Body and eliminated from the society. The def acto complainant is wife among others, including one Yerram Sujatha-LW2, Khaja Chamundeswar Rao-LW7, Khaja Swarajya Lakshmi and created false and fake documents and by admitting fake members to the society in committing the acts of cheating and misappropriation and breach of trust and using as genuine forged documents by forgery of documents. After registration of crime while under investigation, there was order to proceed with investigation if not to arrest and there by investigation completed and filed charge sheet against A1 to A12 of whom A1, A10 & A11 still to be apprehended, obtained orders not to arrest vide Criminal Petition No.5872/2013 and Criminal Petition No.7244/2014 respectively and A12 still in abscondance, wife of A1 and brought charge sheet been filed against her and it establishes the offence committed by them and in the charge sheet, among 11 witnesses besides those referred supra, LWs 8 & 9 are panch witnesses, LWs 10 & 11 are Investigating Officers. So far as A12 concerned, a separate charge sheet filed. Later in August 2014 stating earlier she was shown in abscondance and the evidence collected in the earlier charge sheet already establishes the offence committed by A1 to A12 and thereby a separate charge sheet. Same is the impugnment herein respectively in the two quash petitions.

(3.) Now so far as A12 concerned by name P.Madhavi, W/o.P.Prasad, the contentions in the quash petition heard as A12 are that, LW2, wife of LW1-complainant, is sister of A1, who all started the Education Society and in the course of its functioning, there were disputes between them and there were number of cases pending against each other and the main allegation is only against A1 and there is no basis to implicate the petitioner as A12 and there is no allegation even in the main charge sheet or supplemental charge sheet filed by the Police. The society is non-profitable organization and the affairs are governed by the Societies Registration Act and so far as the misuse of funds by A1 and nothing to implicate the petitioner for any misappropriation and even the defacto complainant stated removed from society by forged documents, is not correct for the removal is by way of only General Body meeting held on 28.01.2013 that was submitted to Registrar of Societies and the General Body got power to remove and admit new members. The de facto complainant filed O.P.No.195/2013 before the Additional District Judge, Khammam, to declare various meetings conducted by society as null and void without seeking cancellation of those resolutions, including removal of him from the society management by the General Body. The Registrar of Societies was also one of the respondents to the said O.P.195/2013 who filed counter opposing the petition averments and impugning the genuineness of resolutions. The petitioner- A12 is not even a member of the society but for of other society by name 'Paulomi Educational Society.' As per the Bye-laws of society, financial transactions are dealt by Secretary and Treasurer of the society and petitioner to array as A12 has no role. Even from the allegations in the charge sheet so to array and no offence made out even from the face value of the allegations to array the petitioner as A12 and therefore, the cognizance order of the learned Magistrate is unsustainable and liable to be quashed from the array of the petitioner as A12 in the police final report taken cognizance.