IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA RPADESH Crl. Petition No. of 2018 Between: Mr. Dilip Kumar Jain and another … Petitioners/Accused AND The State of A.P., represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and 2 others … Respondents RUNNING INDEX S.No. Description of the Documents Date of the document 1. Memorandum of Grounds of Quash Petition 2. Copy of FIR in Cr. No. 523/2017 along with complaint copy 27.07.2017 3. Copy of the Regd. Sale Deed executed in favour of petitioner No.2 08.03.2017 4. Copy of the Registered Sale Deed executed in favour of petitioner No.1 17.3.2017 5. Vakalat Page Nos. Place: Hyderabad Date: Counsel for the Petitioners MEMORANDUM OF CRIMINAL PETITION (Under Section 482 of Crl. P.C.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA RPADESH Crl. Petition No. of 2018 against Crime No: 523/2017 (on the file of P.S. Patamata, Vijayawada) Between: 1. Mr. Dilip Kumar Jain S/o Asal Das, aged 58 years, R/o D.No. 40-8-1, 5th floor, Raj Residency, Murali Park Road, Venkateswarapuram, Vijayawada. 2. Mr.Mohanlal Jain S/o Ambalaji Jain, Aged 48 years, R/o Flat No: 306, Rishab Towers, 3rd floor, Vijayawada –1. … Petitioners/Accused 4&5 AND 1. The State of A.P., represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2. The Station House Officer, P.S.Patamata, Vijayawada 3. Laurent and Benon Hospitality Solutions Pvt. Ltd., rep. by Jagwinder Singh, Site Manager, M3/53, DLF Phase-II, Gurgaon, Harayana State. … Respondents … Respondent/ Complainant The address for the service of all notices and process on the above named petitioners is that of their counsel M/s N. Jayasurya (3875), Smt.G.Malathi, Smt.Ch.Bhargavi, Advocates, Flat No; 302, North East Home, Domalguda, Hyderabad. ..2.. :: 2 :: The above named petitioners/accused respectfully submits as follows:- 1. It is submitted that the 3rd respondent herein filed a complaint against one Korada Nageswara Rao and others including the petitioners herein for the alleged offences under Section 420, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC on the file of P.S.Patamata, Vijayawada city and the same was registered vide FIR No.523/2017 dated 27.07.2017 for the said alleged offences. 2. The 3rd respondent in his complaint alleged that M/s Laurent and Benon Hospitality Solutions Pvt. Ltd., have taken property on lease bearing No: 59A-16/1/15, Teachers Colony, Plot Nos. 3 & 4, Vijaywada and was in possession of the said property by virtue of registered lease deed dated 21.02.2017 registered on 22.02.2017 and that the lease is for a period of (9) years with a locking period of (3) years and the lease consideration is Rs.3,00,000/-. In the said complaint it was further stated that they received a notice from the said Korada Nageswara Rao on 12.07.2017 wherein it was stated to be mentioned that he has refunded back the security deposit and has executed a surrender lease deed dated 29.04.2017 and that they never executed such document nor they have passed any board resolution authorizing any person to do the same and that the security deposit was not refunded back to the said company. In the said complaint it was also stated that the said Nageswara Rao informed that the property has been sold to ..3… :: 3 :: Pusarla Jagannadha, Korada Eswar Prasad, Maddali Kalyan Babu, Dilip Kumar Jain, Mohanlal Jain (the petitioners herein) on the basis of forged and fraudulent surrender lease and that the said surrender lease deed must have been registered on the basis of forged documents, that the executor signing on their behalf is neither their employee nor authorised by the company and that the same was created by a well planned conspiracy by the above said persons. 3. It is submitted that basing on the said allegations, the police registered a case in Crime No. 523/2017 under Section 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC against the petitioners (Accused Nos. 4 & 5) who purchased the property through registered sale deeds dated 17.03.2017 and 8.3.2017 for a valuable even though it is purely a civil dispute between the complainant and the said Korada Nageswazra Rao. 4. It is respectfully submitted that the allegations as made in the complaint against the petitioners herein do not constitute commission of offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 more particularly against the petitioners herein. They are bonafide purchasers of the properties i.e., 3rd Floor and 4th Floor in “Morning Meadows” consisting of 5 Floors for a valuable consideration of Rs. 72,39,000/- through separate sale deeds registered on 17.3.2017 and 08.03.2017 respectively much prior to the said Surrender Lease Deed dated 29.04.2017 said to be forged and fraudulent. Therefore, they have nothing to do with the same. However the complainant ..4… :: 4 :: made allegations in the complaint against the petitioners also for making out a case against them and to bring it within the realm of Criminal Law which otherwise is a civil dispute or an issue between the complainant and their Vendor Mr. Korada Nageswara Rao. It is submitted that the allegations made in the complaint, even if taken at their face value, would not prima facie constitute any offence or make out any case particularly against the petitioners under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC as they are bonafide purchasers of the property prior to the execution of the Surrender Lease Deed said to have been fraudulently executed by the petitioner’s vendor. The complaint is made only to exert pressure on the petitioners and compel delivery of possession which the defacto complainant, if at all would be entitled, on getting a declaration that the Sale Deeds in favour of the petitioners and the Surrender Lease Deed are invalid by a Competent Civil Court. Under the above circumstances, it is respectfully submitted that if prosecution is allowed to continue, it would result in abuse of process of Court and Law and therefore the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners are liable to be quashed. 5. It is respectfully submitted that the dispute between the defacto complainant and the vendor of the petitioners is purely a civil dispute and even assuming criminal in nature, it is between them and therefore institution of proceedings against the bonafide purchasers through registered sale deeds in respect of an alleged transaction much subsequent to the ..5… :: 5 :: purchase of the properties amounts to abuse of process of Court. It is respectfully submitted that the petitioners are not parties to the alleged Surrender Lease Deed and therefore the involvement of the petitioners cannot be assumed under any stretch of imagination. It is respectfully submitted that the 3rd respondent can at best approach the appropriate Civil Court for redressal of its grievance against the vendor of the petitioners, if any and lis between the parties would be decided by the competent Civil Court. The 3rd respondent cannot convert a civil dispute into a criminal proceeding with an ulterior motive to harass or to build pressure on the petitioners. It is pertinent to submit here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajib Ranjan & Others Vs. R. Vijay Kumar (2014 ) observed that one positive step that can be taken by the Courts to curb unnecessary prosecution and harassment of innocent parties by lodging fraudulent complaints is to exercise the power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. 6. It is also respectfully submitted that the petitioners filed application under section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of Anticipatory Bail and the same was allowed vide orders in Crl.M.P.No: 428/2017 in Cr.No: 523/2017 dated 18.09.2017 by the VIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Vijayawada. 7) Under the afore mentioned circumstances, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to crime No.523/2017 on the file of P.S.Patamata,Vijayawada, Krishna District and quash the said proceedings against the petitioners and pass such further or ..6… :: 6 :: other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. ` It is also prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in Crime No.523/2017 on the file of P.S. Patamata, Vijayawada, Krishna District, pending disposal of the above criminal petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Hyderabad, Date: Counsel for Petitioners Krishna District In the High court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the state of Telangana and the state of Andhra pradesh Crl. P. No. of 2018 QUASH PETITION Filed by: M/s N.Jayasurya G.Malathi Ch. Bhargavi Advocates Counsel for the Petitioners MEMORANDUM OF CRIMINAL PETITION MISC. PETITION (UNDER SECTION 482 of Cr. P.C.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH I.A. No. of 2018 in Crl. P. No. of 2018 Between: 1. Mr. Dilip Kumar Jain S/o Asal Das, aged 58 years, R/o D.No. 40-8-1, 5th floor, Raj Residency, Murali Park Road, Venkateswarapuram, Vijayawada. 2. Mr.Mohanlal Jain S/o Ambalaji Jain, Aged 48 years, R/o Flat No: 306, Rishab Towers, 3rd floor, Vijayawada –1. … Petitioners/Accused 4&5 AND 1. The State of A.P., represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2. The Station House Officer, P.S.Patamata, Vijayawada 3. Laurent and Benon Hospitality Solutions Pvt. Ltd., rep. by Jagwinder Singh, Site Manager, M3/53, DLF Phase-II, Gurgaon, Harayana State. … Respondents … Respondent/ Complainant For the reasons stated in the accompanying petition it is prayed that the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in Crime No.523/2017 on the file of P.S. Patamata, Vijayawada, Krishna District, pending disposal of the above criminal petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Hyderabad, COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS Date: Krishna District In the High court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the state of Telangana and the state of Andhra pradesh I.A. No: of 2018 In Crl. P. No. of 2018 STAY PETITION Filed by: M/s N.Jayasurya G.Malathi Ch. Bhargavi Advocates Counsel for the Petitioners In the High court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the state of Telangana and the state of Andhra pradesh I.A. No. of 2018 in Crl.P. No: of 2018 Kadapa District Dilip Kumar Jain and another … Petitioners/Accused By M/s N.Jayasurya (3875) Advocate NATURE OF APPLICATION (Under Sec. 482 of Cr. P.C.) Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay all further in Crime No.523/2017 on the file of P.S. Patamata, Vijayawada, Krishna District, pending disposal of the above criminal petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. . Presented on : Represented on: Filed on: HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Basic information to be furnished in the Writ / Civil / Criminal Cases for NC 1.0 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY No. Year Filing No. (Unregistered) Main No. (Registered) I. DILIP KUMAR JAIN Name of the first petitioner Age : 58 yrs. The State of A.P., represented Age : by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Name of the first respondent District Name YSR KADAPA DISTRICT Computer Code: 3875 Name of the Counsel N.JAYASURYA Bar Council Enrollment No. AP/1137/1992 II. Fee paid by: Challan / Stamps Challan Date: Court Fee Carbon Copy Vakalath Batta in Main Case (Process fees) III. Lower Court Details: Case type Case No. Rs. Rs. Rs. Rs. I.A. (MPs) Court fee Rs. Batta in IA (MPs) (Process fees) Rs. I.A. (MPs) Court fee Rs. Batta in IA (MPs) (Process fees) Rs. I.A. (MPs) Court fee Rs. Batta in IA (MPs) (Process fees) Rs. Total Rs. (for Civil and Criminal cases only) Case year Order date IV. Enclosures: Full Cause Title in Separate Sheet: Main Case Prayer in Separate Sheet: IA (s) Prayer in Separate sheet. Name of the Lower Court / any other IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Crl.P. No. of 2018 CAUSE LIST Between: 1. Mr. Dilip Kumar Jain S/o Asal Das, aged 58 years, R/o D.No. 40-8-1, 5th floor, Raj Residency, Murali Park Road, Venkateswarapuram, Vijayawada. 2. Mr.Mohanlal Jain S/o Ambalaji Jain, Aged 48 years, R/o Flat No: 306, Rishab Towers, 3rd floor, Vijayawada –1. … Petitioners/Accused 4&5 AND 1. The State of A.P., represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2. The Station House Officer, P.S.Patamata, Vijayawada 3. Laurent and Benon Hospitality Solutions Pvt. Ltd., rep. by Jagwinder Singh, Site Manager, M3/53, DLF Phase-II, Gurgaon, Harayana State. … Respondents … Respondent/ Complainant IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (UNDER SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) Crl.P. No. of 2018 Between: Mr. Dilip Kumar Jain and another … Petitioners/Accused AND The State of A.P., represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and 2 others … Respondents MAIN PRAYER: Hon’ble Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to crime No.523/2017 on the file of P.S.Patamata,Vijayawada, Krishna District and quash the said proceedings against the petitioners and pass such further or other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (UNDER SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) I.A. No. of 2018 in Crl.P. No. of 2018 Between: Mr. Dilip Kumar Jain and another … Petitioners/Accused AND The State of A.P., represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad and 2 others … Respondents I.A. PRAYER: Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in Crime No.523/2017 on the file of P.S. Patamata, Vijayawada, Krishna District, pending disposal of the above criminal petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
