Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case in Property Dispute, Imposes Rs 10 Lakh Cost for Misusing Legal Process
In a strong message against the misuse of criminal law in civil disputes, the Supreme Court of India recently delivered a landmark judgment quashing criminal proceedings against a 70-year-old woman and her daughter in a property dispute case. The Court imposed a hefty cost of Rs 10 lakhs on the complainant for abusing the legal process and strongly criticized the High Court for its casual approach in handling the quashing petition.
The case involved Mala Choudhary, a 70-year-old widow of an Army Major General, and her 50-year-old daughter, both residents of New Delhi, who found themselves entangled in criminal proceedings in Telangana over a property dispute. The appellants owned a piece of land measuring 500 square yards in Gachibowli Village, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana, which had been gifted to Mala Choudhary by her paternal grandmother.
The dispute began around 2020 when respondent No. 2 approached Mala Choudhary’s late husband, showing interest in purchasing the land. Unfortunately, Major General Choudhary passed away before any agreement could be executed. The appellants, finding it difficult to manage the property from Delhi, orally agreed to sell the land to the complainant on October 5, 2020, under specific terms and conditions. The total sale consideration was settled at Rs 5.75 crores, provided the entire amount was paid in a single tranche by October 7, 2020. Failure to meet this deadline would increase the price to Rs 6.5 crores, payable by November 7, 2020, and further to Rs 7.5 crores if payment wasn’t made by that date.
Acting on this oral agreement, the complainant transferred Rs 4.05 crores to the appellants’ bank account through various instruments between October and November 2020. However, the appellants claimed no further amount was paid as per the agreement, while the complainant alleged that Rs 75 lakhs had been paid in cash at the time of the oral agreement.
When the transaction couldn’t be finalized, the complainant, who happened to be an agent of an influential builder company M/s Sandhya Constructions and Estates Pvt. Ltd., lodged a complaint leading to FIR No. 771 of 2020 registered at Police Station Gachibowli on December 14, 2020. The FIR alleged that the appellants had induced the complainant to believe they would sell their properties – the 500 sq yard plot in Telangana and a farm in Delhi – for Rs 5 crores, of which Rs 75 lakhs was paid in cash upfront. The complainant also alleged that the appellants assured they had good relations with the neighboring plot owner and would facilitate his plot’s purchase too.
The case took a serious turn when Mala Choudhary, despite being a 70-year-old woman suffering from medical issues including a vertebral fracture, was arrested and kept in custody for eight days from January 13 to 21, 2021. The appellants approached the Telangana High Court seeking quashing of the FIR, but the High Court disposed of their petition in a cryptic manner without addressing the merits.
The Supreme Court, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, strongly criticized the High Court’s approach, noting: “We find the approach of the High Court in casually disposing of the petition filed by the appellants, seeking quashing of the proceedings, without addressing the merits of the matter to be absolutely laconic and perfunctory.”
Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, learned counsel for the appellants, vehemently contended that the allegations in the FIR were false and fabricated. She argued that the complainant, representing an influential builder company, had used its clout to falsely implicate the appellants in a criminal case when the dispute was purely civil in nature. She pointed out that the complainant had already filed a civil suit for specific performance (Original Suit No. 95 of 2021) before the competent civil court at Telangana.
Ms. Shukla highlighted the stark contradictions between the FIR and the civil suit pleadings: “While the relief of specific performance sought in the suit is limited to a plot of land measuring 500 sq. meters, in total contrast, the complainant, while filing the FIR, has attempted to exaggerate the dispute by covering in the oral agreement another property owned by the appellants, i.e., a farm house at Delhi, as well as an adjoining piece of land owned by another party.”
During the hearing, the appellants fairly offered to return the Rs 4.05 crores received through banking transactions if the civil suit was withdrawn. However, the counsel for the complainant demanded interest on the amount for settling the dispute.
The Supreme Court, after thorough examination, found the case to be a clear abuse of legal process. The Court observed: “We are convinced that this is a classic case of the complainant (respondent No.2), who seems to be wielding some clout in the State of Telangana, misusing the process of police investigation so as to entangle the accused appellants who are residents of New Delhi, in a totally false and frivolous prosecution for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.”
The Court noted significant discrepancies between the FIR and the civil suit: “The averments in the impugned FIR are to the effect that the accused appellants orally agreed to sell plot No. 82 and a farm house at Delhi to the complainant for a total consideration of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- (Rupees Five Crores only) whereas in a civil suit which was filed much after the lodging of the FIR, the complainant has specifically averred that the agreement for sale was made for a consideration of Rs. 1,15,000/- per square yard and the total value of the plot was Rs. 5,75,00,000/-.”
The judgment strongly condemned the registration of the FIR and the subsequent arrest of the elderly appellant: “In gross disregard to all tenets of law, the impugned FIR came to be registered for allegations which had no elements of any offence whatsoever what to talk of a cognizable offence. The fact that appellant No. 1 was arrested in this frivolous FIR clearly shows the clout of the company of which the complainant is an agent, on the police agency as not only did the complainant manage to get the FIR registered, but thereafter, also saw to it that appellant No. 1 is arrested and humiliated by keeping her in custody for eight days.”
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and quashed the FIR and all subsequent proceedings. Additionally, the Court directed police protection for the appellants when they visit Hyderabad for property management and imposed a cost of Rs 10 lakhs on the complainant.
The Court stated: “A cost of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) is imposed on the complainant i.e., respondent No. 2 for misusing the process of criminal law and entangling the appellants, who are the wife and daughter respectively of a Retd. Army Major General, in a totally false and concocted criminal case.”
This judgment serves as a significant precedent against the growing trend of using criminal law to settle civil disputes, particularly property matters. The Supreme Court’s strong stance and imposition of heavy costs send a clear message that such misuse of legal process will not be tolerated, especially when it involves harassment of elderly citizens and attempts to use influence to manipulate the justice system.
The ruling also highlights the importance of courts carefully examining quashing petitions rather than disposing of them in a cursory manner, ensuring that justice is not denied to citizens facing frivolous litigation. By providing police protection to the appellants, the Court has also acknowledged the real threats and intimidation that parties can face in such disputes, particularly when dealing with influential opponents.
Petitioner Name: Mala Choudhary & Anr..Respondent Name: State of Telangana & Anr..Judgment By: Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta.Place Of Incident: Gachibowli, Cyberabad, Telangana.Judgment Date: 18-07-2025.Result: allowed.
Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!
Download Judgment: mala-choudhary-&-anr-vs-state-of-telangana-&-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-18-07-2025.pdf
Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment
See all petitions in Fraud and Forgery
See all petitions in Property Disputes
See all petitions in Contract Disputes
See all petitions in Judgment by Vikram Nath
See all petitions in Judgment by Sandeep Mehta
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments July 2025
See all petitions in 2025 judgments
See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
