K. RAVINDRA Vs. M.S. BHARATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is the sole accused in C.C.No.931 of 2015 on the file of the IX 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 1st respondent herein filed a private complaint against the petitioner/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 493 of I.P.C. before the IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, who referred the same to the police, Narayanaguda Police Station, Hyderabad, under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C., for investigation and report. The police registered a case in Crime No.386 of 2014 of Narayanaguda Police Station 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.931 of 2015 and the same is pending on the file of the IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad.

(3.) The allegations in the charge sheet are that the 1st respondent/de facto complainant is residing at Hi-Tech City, Hyderabad, along with her family members. The petitioner/ accused has completed his Doctorate in Management; joined as Commercial Tax Officer and retired as Joint Commissioner in the year 2007. Apart from the job, in the year 1998, the petitioner/accused established a travel agency under the name and style of M/s. Garuda Travels and Tours at Hyderguda, Hyderabad, by appointing his wife as one of the Directors of the above travel agency and he was looking after the day-to-day business after attending his official duties. In the year 1998, the petitioner/accused trapped the 1st respondent, who was working in Hotel Green Park, Greenland, Begumpet, through one of the Directors of his travel agency by name Smt. Rajeshwari Naik and offered her to join in his travel agency along with her sister Ms. Bhanusri as Directors and also offered them to pay handful salary of Rs.10,000/- each apart from 50% share in the profits of the travel agency. When they refused to accept the offer, the petitioner/accused visited their house, convinced their parents, made them to accept the offer and inducted them as Directors in his travel agency on 25.01.1999. The 1st respondent/complainant and her sister worked hardly and developed the travel agency of the petitioner/accused and that the petitioner earned lakhs of rupees and he kept on luring the 1st respondent and her sister to give them handful profits and made them to depend on him totally. It is also alleged that since from the inception as Director, the petitioner/accused kept an evil eye over the 1st respondent in order to fulfill his sexual desire over her, as such the petitioner/accused developed intimacy with her and as per his plan, he started dropping her in her house regularly for some months, lured her to provide all amenities and to give her handful amount and to take care of her as well as her family members and finally proposed to marry her. The petitioner/accused used to take her to sailing club and costly hotels for having dinner. Later on, the 1st respondent/complainant shifted her residence from Begumpet to Hyderguda and the petitioner/accused used to visit her house regularly and arranged all the household articles in her house in order to impress her. Thereafter, on the fateful day, the petitioner/accused went to the house of the 1st respondent/complainant, while her sister Bhanusri was in the office, and taking advantage of her loneliness, the petitioner/accused promised to marry her and had sexual intercourse with her forcibly in spite of her resistance. After that the petitioner/accused continued the sexual relationship with the 1st respondent several times and the petitioner/accused took her to all historical places around India as well as Abroad, made her to stay in costly hotels and enjoyed her sexually on the false promise of marriage. As and when the 1st respondent insisted for marriage, the petitioner/accused used to postpone the issue on one pretext or the other reasons. During the years 2000 to 2005, the petitioner/accused took the 1st respondent to various places such as Vijayawada, Yadagirigutta, Delhi Lotus Temple, TTD Devasthanam, Sanghi Temple, Mahabalipuram, Kanchi Kamakshi Temple, Madhurai Meenakshi Temple, Iskon Temple in Bangalore, but he did not marry her intentionally and used her for fulfilling his sexual desire on the false promise of marriage. It is also alleged that during the month of September, 2010, the petitioner/accused induced the 1st respondent and got her open plot measuring about 500 square yards situated at Poddutur, Shankarapally, Ranga Reddy District, transferred in his name, making her to believe that he will pay the amount, but he did not pay the same. Later on, when the 1st respondent pressurized for marriage, he bluntly refused and evaded to meet her on one pretext or the other.