Telangana High Court
Vemula Raghava Reddy And Another vs Union Of India And 12 Others on 14 July, 2022
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K. Lakshman
1
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION No.18362 OF 2022
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents directing respondent Nos.3 to 6 - Banks from de- freezing the accounts belonging to respondent Nos.7 to 12, pending further investigation by the Police.
2. Heard Sri A.Venkatesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Muralidhar Reddy Katram, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.7 and 10, Sri M.P.Kshyap, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 and Sri S.Ram Mohan, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on behalf of respondent No.13. Perused the record.
3. Perusal of the record would reveal that on the complaint lodged by 2nd petitioner herein, the police, Medchal Police Station had registered a case in Cr.No.181 of 2022, against respondent No.7 for the offence under Section 408 of IPC. During the course of investigation, vide letter dated 02.03.2022 the Investigating Officer in the said crime had requested respondent No.3 to freeze balance accounts of phone No.9959955895 (Mr.Lakku Venugopal Reddy) - 7th respondent, 2 Phone No.9676689777 (Mr.Puttamraju M.A.Chakradhar) - 12th respondent and Phone No.9133311454 (Ms.P.Sumalatha) - 11th respondent, linked with the concerned account number.
4. Sri A.Venkatesh, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Investigating Officer has issued similar letters to respondent Nos.4 to 6. He would further submit that respondent Nos.3 to 6 have acted upon the said lettes, dated 02.03.2022 submitted by the Investigating Officer.
5. The grievance of the petitioners in the present writ petition is that respondent Nos.3 to 6 are trying to de-freeze the said accounts which were freezed pursuant to request made by the Investigating Officer vide letters dated 02.03.2022.
6. This Court vide order dated 11.04.2022 granted interim direction i.e. directing the respondents not to release money from the bank accounts of respondent Nos.2 to 6 to respondent Nos.7 to 12.
7. According to Sri A. Venkatesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, the Investigating Officer has already completed investigation and filed final report on 06.05.2022, referring the complaint as 'civil in nature'. A copy of the same was served on the 2nd petitioner on 09.05.2022. 2nd petitioner herein had filed 3 a protest petition on 11.05.2022 and the learned XXII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Medchal, Ranga Reddy District vide order dated 20.05.2022 referred the said protest petition to the Police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., with a direction to investigate over the said allegations of forgery made by the petitioner No.2 herein. Therefore, the investigation is pending in Cr.No.181 of 2022.
8. Whereas, Sri Muralidhar Reddy Katram, learned counsel for respondent Nos.7 and 10, referring to the counter, would submit that the 1st petitioner had entered into a lease agreement, dated 08.05.2019 with M/s. Josh Innovations Private Limited represented by its Managing Director/R.7 for a period of 10 academic years commencing from 2019-2020 to 2028-2029. The 7th respondent has to pay Rs.1,80,00,000/- towards annual lease. The terms and conditions agreed are specifically mentioned in the said lease agreement. Petitioners have no role in day-to-day administration of the college. According to him, 7th respondent never violated any of the terms of the said lease agreement.
4
9. Whereas, according to Sri A.Venkaesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, the 7th respondent ahs committed criminal breach of trust.
10. It is relevant to note that on the complaint lodged by the 7th respondent, the very same police have registered a case in Cr.No.266 of 2022 against Mr. Malla Reddy, for the offences under Sections 420, 341 and 506 of IPC. On the complaint lodged by the 7th respondent, the very same police have registered another case in Cr.No.300 of 2022 against Mr.Malla Reddy and others for the offences under Sections 324, 341 and 506 read with 34 of IPC. Thus, three crimes are pending.
11. Perusal of the contents in all the said three crimes would reveal that there are disputes between the petitioners, the 7th respondent and others pursuant to the said lease agreement dated 08.05.2019. The investigating officers in the said three crimes have to consider several factual aspects including the allegations made in the complaints. If necessary, they will invoke the procedure laid down under section 102 of Cr.P.C.
12. It is also opt to note that in Cr.No.181 of 2022, the Investigating Officer had already invoked the procedure laid 5 down under Section 102 of Cr.P.C. by way of issuing notices dated 02.03.2022 with a request to respondent Nos.3 to 6 to freeze accounts and the same were frozen.
13. The Investigating Officer in Cr.No.181 of 2022 has to conduct investigation in a fair and transparent manner by following the procedure laid down under Section 102 of Cr.P.C., which deals with Power of Police Officer to seize certain property. Section 102(1) of Cr.P.C. says any Police Officer, may seize any property which may be alleged or suspected to have been stolen, or which may be found under circumstances which create suspicion of the commission of any offence. As per Section 102(2) of Cr.P.C., such police officer, if subordinate to the officer in charge of a police station, shall forthwith report the seizure to that officer.
14. According to petitioners herein, 7th respondent has collected an amount of Rs.69,00,000/- from the students fraudulently and transferred to the accounts of his henchmen. According to Sri Muralidhar Reddy Katram, learned counsel for the 7th respondent, the 7th respondent is entitled to run the institution from the academic year 2019-2020 to 2028-2029 i.e. and the 7th respondent has not committed any fraud, or 6 criminal breach of trust. The 7th respondent is neither a clerk nor a servant of the petitioners and the contents of the complaint lack the ingredients of Section 408 of IPC, as alleged by the petitioners herein. The 7th respondent has been running the institution strictly in terms of the lease agreement, dated 08.05.2019.
15. The said facts and also the pleadings would reveal that there are disputes between the petitioners and the 7th respondent with regard to running of educational institution in terms of the said lease agreement. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the 7th respondent was consultant of the petitioner No.1 and thereafter, he became Member of the petitioner No.1 - Society, which fact was not disputed by learned counsel for the 7th respondent. Therefore, the said disputes have to be resolved by way of filing an application under Section 23 of the Societies Act, 2001 or other legal procedure. However, as stated supra, a case in Cr.No.181 of 2022 is pending with Medchal Police Station. Learned Magistrate has directed the Police to conduct investigation. The Investigating Officer has been conducting investigation and he has already invoked the procedure laid down under Section 102 7 of Cr.P.C. If the account holders are aggrieved by the same, they are at liberty to file appropriate application before the learned Magistrate under Section 451 or 457 of Cr.P.C. If the complainant is aggrieved by the action of the Investigating Officer in not conducting investigation in a fair and transparent manner, it is for him to take steps in accordance with law. In the event of defreezement of accounts by the respondent Nos.3 to 6 - Banks ignoring the proceedings issued by the Investigating Officer under Section 102 of Cr.P.C., it is for the 2nd petitioner/complainant to take steps in accordance with law. Instead of doing so, the petitioners herein have filed the present writ petition alleging that the respondent Nos.3 to 6 - Banks in collusion with the respondent Nos.7 to 12 are trying to permit them to withdraw the amounts from their accounts which were already frozen.
16. Except making a bald allegations there is no basis for the said allegations. However, if respondent Nos.3 to 7 - Banks defreezes the accounts, the petitioners have to take recourse under law.
17. In view of the said discussion, without going into the allegations made by respective parties and merits and demerits, 8 this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Investigating Officer in Cr.No.181 of 2022 pending on the file of Medchal Police Station to conduct investigation in a fair and transparent manner by following the procedure laid down under Cr.P.C. Parties are at liberty to take steps, in accordance with law, by filing appropriate applications. With regard to disputes concerning running of educational institution, liberty is also granted to the parties herein to take steps, in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Societies Act, 2001 or any other legal proceedings. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.
__________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J Date: 14.07.2022 Pn/Vvr