Telangana High Court
Mr. Guda Vinay Kumar vs The State Of Telangana And 4 Others on 21 July, 2023
Author: Lalitha Kanneganti
Bench: Lalitha Kanneganti
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION No. 24549 OF 2022
O R D E R:
The Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:
" ... to issue a writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the high handed action of the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in closing the C.C.No. 1244 of 2022 on the file of the Hon'ble III Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-III Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad at L.B. Nagar dated 10.03.2022 before the Hon'ble Lok Adalath, as if settled before the Hon'ble Lok Adalath, which is impugned, without issuing any notice, contrary to law, without jurisdiction, collusive one to accommodate the accused by Respondent Nos. 4 an 5, which is illegal, irrational and violation of principles of natural justice and violation of Article 14 and 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India consequently setting aside the same by directing the 4th respondent to investigate properly, fairly by following Criminal Procedure Code, and record statements of the petitioner and other witnesses in the interest of justice."
2. Sri Kuriti Bhaskar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working as a software Engineer at Hyderabad and his parents are also staying at Hyderabad. While he was working at M/s Magus Customer Pvt. Ltd., one Smt. Ghanta Vijaya Radhika was also working as a Customer Executive and both of them left the above company and settled in different places. It is submitted that when the petitioner's brother met with an accident during May, 2006 near 2 High-tech city and they were in a sad situation, the said Vijaya Radhika has contacted the petitioner and expressed her condolences and thereafter, she used to be in continuous contact with him and she used to ask hand loans and the petitioner used to provide her. It is submitted that Radhika married one Srinivas and due to differences, she obtained divorce from him and expressed that she wants to marry the petitioner. Though initially he was not interested, Radhika continuously was trapping the petitioner with the help of her husband and her father, took his credit cards, debit cards, pay slip and used the cards for generating some loans and she made a proposal that the petitioner is in need of a residential house and thereby she brought one agent from Punjab National Bank who arranges housing loan to a tune of Rs.59 lacs and without the petitioner's consent based on his pay slips, she applied for personal loan. It is submitted that without the petitioner's signature and consent, the bank officials have generated more than Rs.20 lacs as hand loans for which, the petitioner has to pay the E.M.Is. out of the income derived from his salary of Rs.1,25,000/- per month. It is further submitted that Radhika always assured him that she would marry the petitioner but by that time, her marriage with her first husband is subsisting. It 3 is further submitted that the petitioner was in honey trap in the hands of Vijaya Radhika and her husband Srinivas. The loans which were generated are being deducted from his salary. According to the learned counsel, when the petitioner questioned the fraud played by her and her husband, Vijaya Radhika chalked out a plan for disposing the petitioner and they have conspired together and planned to purchase an independent house and the property which was purchased should be in the name of the petitioner, but with the instigation of the said Radhika and her husband, Punjab National Bank agent and Mr. Santhosh who is Sales Executive have inducted the name of Smt. Ghanta Vijaya Radhika as one of the vendees in which she was shown as daughter of Varahala Swamy and wife of the petitioner. Even till today, her first marriage is still subsisting. It is submitted that on 16.02.2022, the said Radhika gave one peg of alcohol at about 01.30 p.m., before he could question it, where from she got the alcohol, she replied that her father presented it to give it to the petitioner. Immediately after consuming the same, the petitioner fell down and went unconscious. Around 08.30 p.m., one Srinivas and Mr. Pardha Saradhi who are rowdy sheeters came with closed dark masks on their face and tied his hands and legs with 4 strong rope and when he suddenly woke up, they beat him black and blue. According to the learned counsel, the said Vijaya Radhika and her husband and three others were waiting outside the petitioner's house and they had mobile conversation with him. The petitioner received multiple injuries on hands and neck and they all have consumed liquor till 03.00 a.m. and went unconscious. The entire thing happened before Vijaya Radhika and there was no response. Then they tried to kill the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner jumped from his house and able to rescue himself from them and reached his parents' house at 04.00 a.m. on 17.02.2022. Thereafter, he gave a written complaint with the 4th respondent police station. After that, no statement was recorded, no information was given, no witnesses were examined, no enquiry was conducted and the 4th respondent has filed a false statement before the Lok Adalath on 08.03.2022 and the same was numbered as C.C.No. 1244 of 2022 on the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-III Additional Junior Civil Judge at L.B. Nagar. Thereafter, the police asked him to come and referred to the medical test. The petitioner has taken treatment in Aditya Hospital, Uppal. It is submitted that the said Vijaya Radhika has also poured some poison pills on his lower lip and he received two injuries on his 5 lower lip which was also shown to the police. Basing on the complaint, Crime No. 156 of 2022 dated 17.02.2022 was registered under Sections 448, 342, 323 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC. The petitioner was under the impression that the police booked a case under Sections 307 and 420 IPC. and the police promised and contacted him to take treatment in nearby hospital, then he has taken treatment along with his parents. Thereafter, he came to know that the police have arrested Srinivas and Partha Saradhi and though he has contacted several times the 4th respondent there is no response. Learned counsel submits that the statement of the petitioner was not recorded by the police nor they have examined the doctor, who treated him and the neighbouring house owners. It is submitted that police acted in a lethargic and irresponsible manner and they have not verified CC tv footage and later, filed the charge sheet and it was closed before the Lok Adalat. The petitioner came to know that his case was closed before the Lok Adalath on 10.03.2022. Thereafter, he filed a detailed representation on 16.04.2022 to all the respondents that Vijaya Radhika had played fraud. Learned counsel submits that the official respondents, in a high-handed manner, closed the case before the Lok Adalat on 10.03.2022 and no notice was given to 6 him. He has filed the case status which shows uncontested, settled before Lok Adalat and the representations given to the Principal Secretary, Home Department and to all other officers. Basing on this, learned counsel submits that the respondents without even conducting proper enquiry in a high handed manner have resorted to the same.
3. Considering the arguments of the learned counsel, this Court has passed the order dated 08.06.2022 which reads thus:
" Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner gave a complaint before the Medipally police station on 17.02.2022 and the same was registered as crime No.156 of 2022 for the offences under Sections 448, 342, 323 and 506 r/w 34 of lPC. He submits that the petitioner has sustained several injuries and after registering the complaint, the police have failed to conduct investigation, no statements were recorded and no enquiry was conducted. He further submits that the police filed a false statement before the Lok Adalath on 08.03.2022 and the same was numbered as C.C No.1244 of 2022 on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-III Addl. Junior Civil Judge at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. Even before the Lok Adalath also, petitioner was not present. He further submits that without the presence of both the parties, the matter cannot be decided before the Lok Adalath. He submits that after coming to know about the same, the petitioner gave a detailed representation to the respondents on 16.04.2022 and as there is no response from them, the petitioner has come up before this court. The complaint given by the petitioner was registered as Crime No.156 of 2O22 by the Medipally Police station on 17.02.2022. As per the material filed before this court i.e. on line status of the case in the e-courts, the said crime is shown registered as Case No.1244 of 2022 on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-III 7 Additional Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar and further the nature of disposal of the said case is shown as un-contested "settled before Lok Adalat". Particularly taking into consideration the statement of the learned counsel that the petitioner was not present and his statement was not recorded, this court deems it appropriate to call for the record pertaining to Case No.1244 of 2022 before the III Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar. Registrar (Judicial) is directed to communicate this order, to call for the entire record pertaining to C.C.No.1244 of 2022 on the file of III Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar and shall place the same before this court. The learned Assistant Government Pleader shall file a detailed counter affidavit about the investigation that is taken up by the respondents after registering the complaint on 17.02.2022.
Post this matter on 15.06.2022."
4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 4th respondent. Learned Government Pleader for Home submits that after registering the complaint, investigation has been taken up by the 5th respondent. During the course of investigation, complainant and two witnesses were examined and their statements were recorded and a notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. was issued to the accused persons. The Medical Officer issued wound certificate dated 17.02.2022 and opined that the injuries are simple in nature and basing on that, section of law was altered from Section 323 to 324 IPC. Basing on the evidence and merits of the investigation, prima facie case was established against the accused persons, as such after 8 finalizing the investigation, charge sheet was filed on 28.02.2022 before the III Metropolitan Magistrate, L.B. Nagar and the same was numbered as C.C.No. 1244 of 2022. It is stated that during the course of trial, Accused Nos. 1 to 3 had admitted their guilt for the offences under Sections 448, 342, 324, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. Accused Nos. 1 to 3 were convicted under Section 252 Cr.P.C. and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each for the offence under Section 448 IPC., a fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 342 IPC., fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 506 IPC. and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. Total fine amount of Rs.12,000/- was paid. It is stated that the contention of the petitioner that the respondent police did not conduct the investigation properly is incorrect and far from truth. It is stated that the 5th respondent visited the scene of offence and examined three witnesses, recorded their detailed statements and after finalising the investigation, filed the charge sheet on 28.02.2022. The contention that the case is closed is also baseless and has been created for the purpose of filing the petition.
5. A reply-affidavit was filed by the petitioner stating that when there are so many injuries received by him, the police 9 should have referred him to the hospital but he admitted in a private hospital. It is stated that no copy of FIR. was issued to him and he was under the impression that a case for the offences under Sections 307, 448, 324, 323, 420, 506 read with Section 34 was registered against the accused but the respondent police have registered the case for the minor offences. On line website disclosed that the case was closed as "Settled before the Hon'ble Lok Adalath". After sending the representation as he failed to receive any response, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition. The petitioner stated that the 4th respondent did not mention in the counter affidavit that the copy of the FIR was given free of cost. Secondly, when the investigation is conducted, he should have called the petitioner and recorded the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. According to the petitioner, no investigation is made. The Investigating Officer has mentioned that the neighbours are not eye witnesses nor the circumstantial witnesses. They were not called to the police station at any point of time by following the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is stated that no notice is given to the victim but in the counter, the respondents stated that by way of registered post they sent notice to the petitioner / complainant herein. It is stated that the offences 10 registered are minor offences and the police ought to have registered the same for major offences. Hence it is stated that action has to be initiated and this Court shall issue appropriate directions against the respondents.
6. Having heard leaned counsel on either side, perused the entire material on record.
7. The grievance of the petitioner is that the accused have attempted to do away with his life and he has sustained injuries and gave a complaint to the police. The police have registered a crime and without conducting any investigation, without giving any notice to him, referred the matter to the Lok Adalat and the same was closed before the Lok Adalat. This Court on 08.06.2002 called for the entire record from the lower Court. The record placed before this Court shows that the matter is not compromised but as the accused have accepted the guilt, they were convicted and the Court below has imposed fine of Rs.12,000/- on all the accused. As per the FIR, initially, crime was registered under Sections 448, 342, 323, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. Thereafter, the Sub-Inspector of Police has requested the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B. Nagar that as per Dr. Satish Chandra, Casualty Medical Officer, Aditya Hospital, Uppal who treated the petitioner issued medical 11 certificate and opined that the injuries sustained are simple in nature. Basing on that, the section of law was altered from Section 323 go 324 IPC. Thereafter, the police have filed the charge sheet. As per the charge sheet, they have recorded the detailed statements of the complainant as L.W.1 in Part II CD under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He visited the scene of offence situated at Plot No. 12, MBR Nagar Road, HMDA, Narapally, Near Suprabhat Township, caused discreet enquiries into the matter, examined and recorded the statements of the witnesses L.Ws.2 and 3 in Part-II CD, conducted scene of offence panchanama in the presence of two mediators L.Ws.4 and 5, drew the rough sketch and brought all observations on the record. On 18.02.2022, he called up Accused Nos. 1 to 3 to police station and served Section 41(A)(1) Cr.P.C. notices to them with instructions to submit their explanation. Accused 1 to 3 were assured to do so and submit their explanations. L.W.8 satisfied and let them with instructions to appear before the court during the trial and cooperate with the Investigating Officer during the investigation. L.W.6 who treated the petitioner issued medical certificate and opined that the sustained injuries of L.W.1 are simple in nature. As per the collected evidence and Medical Certificate, section of law was 12 altered. Accordingly, they have filed charge sheet for the offences under Sections 448, 342, 324, 506 read with Section 34 IPC. L.W.1 is the complainant, L.W.2 is father of the petitioner, L.W.3 is mother of the petitioner, L.Ws.4 and 5 are panch for scene of offence. L.W.6 is a doctor, who treated the petitioner. The said record placed before the Court also shows the statement of the mother of the petitioner and all the notices issued under Section 41(A)(1) Cr.P.C. and also medical legal record of Aditya Hospital. The docket order dated 10.03.2022 reveals that Accused Nos. 1 to 3 are present and they were examined under Section 251 Cr.P.C. They have admitted the guilt and accordingly, the Court has convicted them for the offences and sentenced them to pay fine.
8. Though it is stated that the matter was settled in Lok Adalat, as per the docket order, the Court has convicted the respondents and sentenced them to pay fine.
9. According to the petitioner, Vijaya Radhika and Srinivas should have been charged with some other sections than what they have been charged. All these things this Court cannot go into in this Writ Petition. The material on record falsifies the contention of the petitioner that no investigation is done and the matter is compromised in Lok Adalath. If at all the 13 petitioner has any grievance against any of the lapses on the part of the police or altering sections of law, he has remedies before the appropriate forum but not before this Court.
10. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedies.
11. The Miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand automatically closed.
-----------------------------------
LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 21st July 2023 ksld