Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
B.Chenchu Ramaiah vs State Of Ap on 2 August, 2019
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU
CRIMINAL PETITION No.835 of 2019
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.
This Criminal Petition is filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash all further proceedings in C.C. No. 1151 of 2015 on the file of the Court of II Additional Munsif Magistrate, Ongole.
The complainant and the accused are involved in long drawn battle. Accused Nos.1 and 2 have taken the property on lease from the APSRTC under BOT Scheme and constructed a complex which was rented out to the complainant. The uncontroverted fact show that the tenant has not paid the arrears. Therefore, a suit in O.S. No.173 of 2013, on the file of Family Court-cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Ongole, was filed for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,05,11,560/-, which was decreed along with interest etc., on 27.12.2016.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that with a view to avoid the decretal amount and eviction proceedings criminal cases are being filed at regular intervals by the 2nd respondent-complainant. He points out that on earlier occasion C.C.No.690 of 2013 was filed for an offence under Sections 447, 506 and 323 read with 34 IPC against the petitioners. The same went trial and the accused were 2 acquitted. Learned counsel submits apart from that another compliant in C.C.No.712 of 2015 was filed for the offence under Section 506 read with 34 IPC, besides the present impugned complaint, which was numbered as C.C. No.1151 of 2015, on the file of II Additional Munsif Magistrate, Ongole. Learned counsel submits that a pure civil dispute is converted into a criminal case in order to coerce the accused to come into a settlement. He relies upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in Joseph Salvaraj A v State of Gujarat and Others1. He relies upon paragraphs 23 to 25 of the said judgment and points out that in the case before the Supreme Court also a complaint for the offence under Section 506 was filed. He relies upon paragraph 25 of the said judgment, which is as follows:
"25. In our opinion, the matter appears to be purely civil in nature. There appears to be no cheating or a dishonest inducement for the delivery of property or breach of trust by the Appellant. The present FIR is an abuse of process of law. The purely civil dispute, is sought to be given a colour of a criminal offence to wreak vengeance against the Appellant. It does not meet the strict standard of proof required to sustain a criminal accusation."
Following the said judgment, learned counsel states that this is a fit case to quash the proceedings.
In reply to this learned counsel for the 2nd respondent states that it is a fact that there are civil disputes. He also 1 2011 (0) SCJ Online (SC) 1059 (DB) 3 agrees that there are cases and counter cases are pending between the parties. However, he asserts that the petitioners forcibly tried to evict the complainant. The accused are periodically trying to intimidate and threaten the complainant and his staff. He states only because of the attitude of the accused, the complainant was forced to approach the police for protection. Learned counsel also relies upon the statements of witnesses recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. and points out that all the statements are consistent. He also relies upon the statement of L.Ws.3 and 4, who according to him are independent witnesses. Learned counsel submits that in this case both the witnesses, apart from other witnesses, have testified to the occurrence of the incident. Therefore, he submits that once the charge sheet has been filed and the matter is now ripe for trial, quashing the proceedings at this stage is not possible. He submits that quashing of proceedings is only possible when there is no case visible from a prima facie reading of the complaint or the Court is of the opinion that for some reasons continuing the prosecution would be an abuse of the process of law. In the case on hand learned counsel submits that after following the due procedure the police have registered a case and examined the witnesses and filed charge sheet. Therefore, he submits that this is not a fit case to quash the proceedings.
The power to quash the proceedings is very wide but as stated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, it should be 4 used with care and caution. Only in cases where the Court is of the opinion that a reading of the complaint itself would show that no case is made out at all and continuing of the proceeding would amount to an abuse of process of law, this Court should interfere and quash the proceedings.
An examination of facts of this case shows that after the FIR was registered witnesses were examined and the witnesses who fairly consistent in what they have stated in the statements recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. The statement made by the learned counsel that the witnesses, who are not connected with the landlord tenant dispute, have been examined also carry some weight. In the case on hand, this Court notices that there is definitely a civil dispute. The mere fact that there is a civil dispute it does not lead to a conclusion that every complaint or report lodged thereafter is given with a motivated intention to coerce the petitioner. This Court after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners is also unable to understand how a report under Section 506 IPC would help the landlord to achieve an objective of bringing the tenants to his knees.
After hearing the contentions in view of the fact that Calendar Case is of the year 2015 and the matter is ripe for trial, this Court holds that this is not a stage to quash the proceedings. There is some material available to proceed further with the case. Therefore, for all these reasons the criminal petition is liable to be dismissed. 5
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand dismissed.
__________________________ D.V.S.S. SOMAYAJULU, J Date:02.08.2019 Ssv