THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2094 OF 2010
O R D E R:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) to quash the proceedings in crime no. 10 of 2010 of I Town police station, Rajahmundry
2. The second respondent/complainant lodged a complaint before the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class,Rajahmundry
3. It is alleged inter alia in the complaint that A.1 obtained a loan from the complainant bank on 31.1.2007 by producing title deed and pattadar pass book alleged to have been issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO), Nidadavole in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.9.40 cents situated in survey no.56/1 of Gopavaram village; that Jagathi Lovaraju, who daughter of A.1, stood as co-applicant; she also produced her title deed and pattadar pass book alleged to have been issued by the said MRO; that, A.2, who is son of A.1, also produced pattadar pass book alleged to have been issued by the said MRO stating that he is the absolute owner of land admeasuring Ac.7.42 cents in survey no.119 and Ac.4.10 cents in survey no.120; that A.3 also applied for loan by producing her pattadar pass book in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.2.45 cents in survey no.95, and Ac.6.70 cents in survey no.96; that the complainant bank approached the revenue officials and made enquiries and came to know that the above lands do not belong to the respective accused persons and that the pattadar pass books produced by them were not issued by the concerned revenue officials, and hence, the complaint.
4. Heard both sides.
5. Inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised when there is abuse of process of court or to secure ends of justice or to carryout the order passed under this Court. There cannot be any dispute that if the uncontroverted allegations made in the complaint make out a prima facie case for the offences alleged, the question of quashing the complaint does not arise.
6. The offences alleged are 417, 420, 467 read with 34 IPC. For an offence under Section 420 IPC, it has to be shown that not only a person has cheated someone, but also that by doing so, he has dishonestly induced a person who was cheated to deliver any property, etc. A person can be said to have done an act dishonestly if he does so with the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another person.
Section 417 IPC prescribes punishment for the offence of cheating. A reading of Section 415 IPC, which defines ‘cheating’, it is manifest that two different classes of acts are set forth which the person deceived may be induced to do so. In the first class, he may be induced fraudulently or dishonestly to deliver any property to any person. Second class of facts set forth in the section are that doing or omitting to do anything which the person deceived would not do or omit to do if he were not so deceived.
Section 467 IPC deals with forgery of valuable security.
7. Prima facie there is allegation that the petitioners fabricated title deeds and pattadar pass books and obtained loans from the complainant bank by producing the said documents, and thereby they got wrongful gain causing wrongful loss to the bank. In view of the fact that the allegations in the complaint made out a prima facie case for the offences alleged, the question of quashing the complaint does not arise.
8. The Criminal Petition is devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
________________
(K.C.BHANU, J.)
03.04.2012
DRK
