CRLP/14460/2025 of Al. Vanga Shyam Sunder Reddy, Vs State of Telangana, on 31 December 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal petition is filed by the petitioners_accused Nos.1 and 2 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.269 of 2023 on the fite of tearned Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Shadnagar, registered for the offences under Sections 42O,504 and 506 of l.p C

2. Heard Sri t\4. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional public Prosecutor for respondent No. 1 _State

E'tD,J P.No 14460 of202i hat there are 1 respondent : filed a Suit injunction is plainant. He a complaint e is pending. rt case as a :ivil side and rbmitted that 1 is 'l 1 years delay of 11 clings in the

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submittecl land disputes pending between the petitioners arr No.2-de facfo complainant; that the petitioners har, for injunction, which is pending; and that ad interit granted in their favour and against the de facto cofi further submitted that petitioner No.1 has also file< against the de facto complainant herein and the sarr Thus, the de facto complainant has filed the prese counter blast to the said case to setfle the scores on to arrive at settlement in the said case. He further s the alleged transaction with regard to the subject lar old and that the complaint is lodged with a hugr: years. He, therefore, prayed to quash the procer present C.C. against the petitioners herein.

4. Learned Additional public prosecutor subrri ted that the contention of delay cannot be a ground to quash th,: proceedings in the present C.C. He further submitted that ilr , allegations levelled against the petitioners are that they cheate: the de facto complainant and further, threatened him with dire c: rsequences. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss the Cdminal petitio r

5. )erused the record.

*-..r.-.Yr.t .rry_., ETD,J Crl.P.No.l4460 of2025

6. The allegations in the complaint point out that the de facto complainant is the absolute owner of agricultural land to an extent of Ac.8-00 in Survey Nos.489/A, 490/4 and 492lA situated at Kishannagar Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, having purchased the same under registered Sale Deed, dated 27.07.2011, from Vanga Prasanna and ever since then, he is in peaceful possession of the same. lt is alleged that subsequenfly, his vendor with a criminal intention sold away the same part of agricultural land to three others, by names, Veeranki Venkateshwarlu, Chilkamarri Lingam and A. Venkat Reddy, and that he learnt about the said transaction while searching for Encumbrance Certificate and when he questioned the same, his vendor Vanga prasanna and her husband, Vanga Shyam Sunder Reddy, and also the subsequent purchasers abused him and threatened him with dire consequences. Thus, the allegations point out the alleged offences under Seciions 420, SO4 and 506 of l.p.C. against the petitioners herein. The contrention of the petitioners' counsel is that the matter is of purely civil in nature But, the allegation of double registration of the land sold to lhe de facto complainant being sold to three other persons subsequenfly would involve a criminal intention and once the criminality exists there would not J

EI'D.J Ci ' No.14460 o12025 )rd discloses S.No.11B of tagar, along ' injunction nterlocutory filed a Suit Civil Judge, rnother and of 2023 of he offences agarnst the :omplaint is rers herein. arties. The of the land rer persons rgainst the , the delay -"sent C.C. e decided allegations be any bar to institute criminal proceedings. The rer: that the de facto complainant has filed a Suit vrde () 2022 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, ShaJ with lnterlocutory Application seeking temporar against petitioner No.2 and others and the said Application was dismissed. The petitioner No.1 has vrde O.S.No.1B of 2023 on the file of learned Senior Shadnagar, against the de facfo complainant and has also lodged a complaint yrde Crime No.46C Shadnagar Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for under Sections 447,323 and 504 read with 34 l.p.C. de facto complainant and others. Now, the present lodged by the de facto complainant against the petitir: Admittedly, there are land disputes between both the 1 petitioners are facing allegations of double registratior sold to the de facto complainant being sold to three ot subsequently. Thus, prima facie case is made oul petitioners herein. Since there are serious allegation: is not a ground to quash the proceedings in the trrr against the petitioners herein and the same can I during the course of trial. The truth or otherwise of thr:

--.:ry':' EI'D,J Crl.P.No.14460 of2025 would also be brought out during the course of trial. Therefore, it is deemed appropriate to dispense with the attendance of the petitioners before the trial Court.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of dispensing To, PSI(BA YY with the attendance of the petitioners before the trial Court provided they are represented by a counsel before the trial Court on every date of hearing and shall appear before the trial Court whenever their presence is required during the course of trial Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed Sd/- A. SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

1. The Additional Judicial First Class Magiskate, Shadnagar, Rangareddy District.

2. The Station House Offlrcer, Shadnagar Police Station, Rangareddy District

3. One CC to Sri Maram Anil Kumar, Advocate [OPUC].

4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad [OUTI.

5. Two CD Copies.

HIGH COURT DATED:3111212025 t a):) 1l

: ::--a ,tai€)^\.;.,.r s r.\ ( ( * ' I 7lllh f' I * \() llt i

ORDER

CRLP.No.14460 ot 2025 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITICI { ^\ r{c': { (r. -<i\ Ll. --ry2 tt' o