B. Siva Sankara Rao, J. - (1.) The quash petition is filed by the sole petitioner who is A.4 among 8 accused (as per chargesheet showing A.5 to A.7 in abscondence) in C.C.No.112 of 2014 on the file of the XII Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Hyderabad outcome of Cr.No.11 of 2005 of Begumpet Police Station registered for the offences punishable u/sec. 420, 471 and 468 IPC, on the complaint of 2nd respondentdefacto-complainant, with the contentions in the quash petition that the defacto-complainant is a Minister for Rural Development and Water Resources and Employment (for short, 'RD & WR & E') in the then composite State of Andhra Pradesh sometime in the year 2005. In fact, he did not complain to the police on the alleged date of complaint-04.01.2005 that but his letterhead was used for the purpose of addressing a letter to the Consulate General of Republic of France by A.6, A.7 and A.8 for the purpose of obtaining VISA. The petitioner is implicated in the said case on the alleged confession of A.6 to A.8 who were trying to get VISA of Republic of France. Even in the chargesheet there are no specific allegations against the petitioner as to how he is liable in the criminal case to implicate for no criminal offence was committed by the petitioner and as such prosecution of the petitioner is an abuse of process of law and is liable to be quashed as per the law laid down by the Apex Court in Indian Oil Corp. Vs. NEPC Ltd, 2006 6 SCC 736 para-2. Hence the quash petition.
(2.) The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner reiterated the same in the course of hearing and seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. The learned Public Prosecutor vis- -vis the learned counsel for the defacto-complainant-2nd respondent opposed the same saying the police after investigation filed chargesheet from the prima facie accusation against as many as 8 accused of whom the A.5 to A.7 in abscondence but for others facing the accusation in C.C.No.112 of 2014 taken cognizance by the learned Magistrate for the offences supra after examination of 7 witnesses by citing 14 witnesses in all including investigating Officer, thereby sought dismissal of the quash petition.
(3.) Heard both sides and perused the material on record.;