MEMORANDUM OF CRIMINAL PETITION

(Under Section 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

Crl.P.No. of 2019
Against
Crime No.270/2019 of Etcherla Police Station, Srikakulam District.
Between:

1. Modalavalasa Ramaswamy S/o Late Kurmanna,

Aged about 55yrs, R/o Fareed peta Village & Post,
Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District.

2. Modalavalasa Kooramanadam S/o Rama Swamy,

Aged about yrs, R/o Fareed peta Village & Post,
Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District.

3. Modalavalasa Poli Naidu S/o Rama Swamy,

Aged about yrs, R/o Fareed peta Village & Post,
Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District.
…Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 3
AND

1. The State of Andhra Pradesh

rep by its Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati.

2. Budumuru Krishna Rao, S/o Dhanunjaya Rao,

Aged about 55yrs, Occ: Advocate,
R/o Flat No.1, Aishwarya Residence,
Seethammadhara, Visakhapatnam City,
Visakhapatnam District.
…Respondents

The address for service of all notices and processes is that of their
counsel Rama Krishna Akurathi (9713), Flat No.611, Pine, Raintree Park,
Nagarjuna Nagar, Nambur, Guntur District.

The present Criminal Petition is filed, praying to grant Regular Bail in

connection with Crime No.270/2019 of Etcherla Police Station, Srikakulam
District.

PROSECUTION CASE

1. The 2nd respondent/de-facto complainant gave a report to

Superintendent of Police at Spandana Program alleging that he purchased a
dry land an extent of Ac-1.50cents on 23.06.1997 from the 1 st petitioner
through a unregistered agreement of sale coupled with possession, since
then he is in possession of the land having rights and mutated land on the
names of the 2nd respondent and his wife in the revenue records and also
obtained Agricultural income certificate. The 2 nd respondent had run a
cement brick industry in some part of the land by obtaining all necessary
permissions for some years, thereafter he closed the industry due to losses
sustained, he raised some dry crops and have some teak plantation in the
remaining land. On 06.09.2019 the petitioners along with some other
unidentified persons trespassed into the land, damaged the brick industry,
platform, sheds with the JCB and lorries and damaged the property worth
of Rs.15 lakhs, the care taker of my property and another person having
witnessed the incident questioned the petitioners about their highhanded
behavior, the petitioners allegedly threatened them with dire
consequences and proclaimed that they will see the end of the 2 nd
respondent. The 2nd respondent gave a report to police, but no action has
been taken. As such he gave a report to in Spandana Programme, basing on
which the police registered a case in Crime No.270/2019 of Etcherla Police
Station, Srikakulam District. Aggrieved by the same the Petitioner filed
criminal petition for the following among other grounds.
GROUNDS
i. The Petitioners humbly submit that they are innocents of the alleged
offence and they did not commit any offences much less the offence under
sections 447, 427, 506 IPC r/w 34 IPC of Etcherla Police Station.

ii. The Petitioners submit that absolutely there is no iota of truth in the
allegations leveled by the 2nd respondent in his report, the 2 nd respondent
who is a legal practitioner created a false documents by forging the
signature of the 1st petitioner as if he purchased the land and obtained
unregistered agreement of sale, coupled with possession and basing on
which he is in possession of the land. The alleged agreement of sale
according to the 2nd respondent was on 23/06/1997, but it does not take
any steps to file proper proceedings for registration of the land in his
favour. Basing on the forged agreement of sale, the 2 nd respondent gifted
the property to his wife and the same was registered dt.18.08.2010, basing
on which he gave a representation to Tahsildar for mutation of names in
the Revenue Records. Surprisingly in the year 2015, the petitioners came to
know that the name of the 1 st petitioner and his ancestors were deleted in
the Revenue Records with regard to some extents of land and the name of
the 2nd respondent was mutated, after the 1st petitioner submitted number
of representations dt. 09.07.2015, 01.04.2017,04.05.2017, 27.06.2017 and
14.05.2018 to the Tahsildar, Etcherla Mandal, he issued Endorsement dt.
23.05.2018 thereby refused to mutate the name of the 1 st petitioner and as
such the 1st petitioner filed Writ Petition before this Hon’ble High Court vide
W.P.No.31812 of 2018 questioning the Endorsement dt.23.05.2018, the
writ petition was disposed of directing the 1 st petitioner to file an appeal
before the competent authority by ordering to maintain status quo.
iii. It is further humbly submitted that the 1 st petitioner filed an appeal
before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Srikakulam, after heard the matter
the learned Revenue Divisional officer –cum-Sub Divisional Magistrate,
Srikakulam passed a detailed order by allowing the appeal filed by the 1 st
petitioner by giving direction to the Tahsildar to change the entries by
issuing E-Pass Book in favour of the appellant/1 st petitioner by deleting the
names of 2nd respondent and his wife, thereafter the 2nd respondent issued
a legal notice dt.06.09.2019 calling the 1 st petitioner to perform his part of
contract, on the same day he alleged that the petitioners allegedly
trespassed into the site and thereby damaged the property which is a
blatant lie and when the 2nd respondent being legal practitioner in order to
coerce the petitioners to his terms under the guise of implicate them in a
false case. The 2nd respondent approached his authorities with unclean
hands, to cover up his latches raised several unholy proceedings.
iv. The petitioners submit that questioning the order passed by the
learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate cum Revenue Divisional Officer, the 2 nd
respondent filed a writ petition before this Hon’ble Court vide
W.P.No.12244 of 2019 and obtained interim order for a limited period, the
1st petitioner filed his detailed counter along with vacate petition and the
same is pending. Surprisingly the 2nd respondent after 22 years approached
the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Srikakulam, filed a suit in
O.S.No.376 of 2019 seeking the relief of specific perform of agreement of
sale and the same is pending. Till 2015 some extent of lands and 2018 for
some extent of lands the name of the 1st petitioner is appears in the
Revenue Records, the 2nd respondent being legal practitioner put his
covetous eye on the property of the petitioners, in order to grab the same
he stooped down to create forged documents and basing on the forged
document bequeathed the same to his wife under a gift deed, somehow
managed the registration authorities and got it registered, basing on which
he approached the Revenue Officials, somehow managed them and
mutated their names in the Revenue Records. In the above factual
background of the matter, it is clear that the 2 nd respondent which has legal
brain created a fictitious litigation by forging the documents in order to
grab the property of the petitioners, the present case is one among those
false creations of the 2nd respondent.
v. The petitioners humbly submit that the 3 rd petitioner who selected
for the post of Police Constable (AR), the 2 nd respondent thought that if the
petitioners No.2 & 3 were also implicated in this case, then only the 1 st
petitioner come down for his terms. Absolutely there is no iota of truth or
the specific overt acts against the petitioners about the alleged utterances
and threatening, the 2nd respondent made omnibus allegations against the
petitioners and foisted the present false case. The ingredients of the above
sections of law are not at all attracted and the 2 nd respondent has no right
or title over the property, this Hon’ble Court as well as the Hon’ble Apex
Court repeatedly held that the agreement of sale unregistered does not
confer any title.
v. The petitioners humbly submit that according to the dictum laid
down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Bhajan Lal’s case the initiation of
criminal case for wrecking vengeance or with some ill motive is a ground for
quashment of proceedings.

vi. Therefore it is submitted that the above crime was registered against
the petitioners by the 2nd respondent with a malafide intention to grab the
landed property belonged to the petitioners and as registration of crime is
illegal and liable to be quashed.

It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to

quash the proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 3 in Crime
No.270/2019 of Etcherla Police Station, Srikakulam District and pass such
other order or orders as this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case.

Pending disposal of the criminal petition, it is prayed that this

Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings
including arrest of the Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 3 in Crime No.270/2019
of Etcherla Police Station, Srikakulam District and pass such other order or
orders as this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances
of the case.
Amaravati
Dated: 25.11.2019 Counsel for the Petitioner
 Crl.P.No. of 2019

RUNNING INDEX

S. No. Description of the documents Date of Date of Page

(1) (2) Paper Filing Nos.
(3) (4) (5)
1. Criminal Petition 25.11.2019 25.11.2019 1-3

2. Copy of the FIR in Crime -do-

No.270/2019 of Etcherla Police
Station, Srikakulam along with
translation
3. Copy of Agreement of Sale and 23.06.1997
translation

4. Copy of order in W.P.No.31812 -do-

of 2018

5. Copy of order in 14.08.2019 -do-

R.C.No.1378/2018C

6. Copy of Legal notice 06.09.2019 -do-

7. Copy of plaint in -do-

O.S.No.376/2019

8. Copy of Adangal/Pahani -do-

9. Copy of Selection letter -do-

10. Copy of counter affidavit -do-

(vacate petition) in
W.P.No.12244 of 2019
11. Vakalat 25.11.2019 - do - 11

Amaravati

Dated 25.11.2019 Counsel for the Petitioners

TRANSLATION OF POSSESSORY AGREEMENT DT. 23.06.1997

POSSESSORY AGREEMENT FOR Rs.40,000/-

On 23rd June 1997

I. Executed in favour of: Budumuru Krishna Rao, Late Dhanunjaya Rao, R/o
Dharmapuram Village, Ponduru Mandal, Srikakulam District and presently
residing in Visakhapatnam

Executed by: Modalavalasa Ramaswamy, S/o Late Kurmanna, R/o

Fareedpeta Village, SM Puram, Etcherla Mandal, Srikakulam District.

II. The below mentioned in 3rd para is my ancestral property and mutated
my name in revenue records and paying cist and in my possession and there
is no mortgage, security, agreement of sale etc., to any third persons
without any alienation and the said property is requested by you, to clear
my families loans and to sell the same to you, on this day received sale
consideration amount of Rs.40,000/- from you. The schedule land shall was
handover the possession to you and the same can be changed into your
name and enjoy by you and our legal heirs will not cause any hurdles or
interfere etc, to you.

III. Schedule details

Srikakulam District, Ponduru Sub-Registrar, SM Puram Taluk,

Fareedpeta Village vide Patta No.808 and the survey numbers and extent
are as follows:

557/3 0.40
557/7 0.25
558/21 0.03
558/30 0.07
558/31 1.37

Total Ac.2.12 Cents and the boundaries are not mentioned and schedule
property is acquired by you with all rights.
TRANSLATION OF ENDORSEMENT, DT. 23.05.2018

Rc.No.20/2018.A, dt. 23.05.2018

ENDORSEMENT

Sri Modalavalasa Ramaswamy submitted an application before the

District Collector in Prajale Mundu programme to mutate his name in
Revenue Records and to issue Pattadar Passbook vide Application No.2018-
15929618, dt. 14.05.2018. On this application the mandal revenue officials
and the village revenue officer-II, S.M Puram village have submitted a report
after looking into the village records as stated below.

As per the above report the subject land was gifted in favour of Smt
Budumuru Tirumala, W/o Krishna Rao vide Gift Deed Document
No.2573/2010, dt. 18.08.2010. In the 1-B Register the land was mutated in
the name of Smt. Budumuru Tirumala, W/o Krishna Rao with Khata
No.2108. At present the land is not under cultivation of anybody and on
enquiry in the village it is known that at present land of Ac.1.44 cents in
Survey No.30 and 558/31 is in dispute and the changes cannot be made.

Therefore, it is informed that in view of the above report the change

of name cannot be made in respect of the land Ac.1.44 cents in Survey
No.558/30 and 558/31 and accordingly endorsement given.

Sd/-xxxxx