ORDER: ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short ‘ BNSS ’) by petitioner/accused to quash the proceedings in Crime (FIR) No.592 of 2024 on the file of Vemulawada Town Police Station, Rajanna Sircilla District registered for offence under Section 420 of IPC vide FIR dated 05.11.2024. 2. Heard Mr. V.V.Ramana Rao, learned counsel for petitioner/accused, learned Additional Advocate General for respondent No.1-State and Mr. A.P.Suresh Ram, learned counsel appearing independently for the officer, without there being a vakalat. Learned Senior Counsel Avinash Desai is appointed as amicus. 3. This case has a chequered history. This Court is conscious of the fact that a contempt case is pending before this High Court for non-compliance of orders in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 and a Writ Appeal preferred challenging the orders in writ petition as on date. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner/ accused that house bearing No. 7-13 (H.No.4-37/1), at Anupuram Village, was acquired by Government in 2004, compensation was paid, but her name was not shown in the list of project displaced families. That, she filed W.P.No.31271 of 2016 in the High Court and the High Court by order dated 02-11-2023 held that her family comes under the definition of “Project Displaced Family”. It is further submitted that for non compliance of the order(s) of High Court, she filed a contempt case bearing No.1937 of 2024 (filed on 19.09.2024), pending on the file of the High Court as on date. It is also submitted that a Writ Appeal bearing No.688 of 2024 (filed on 06.06.2024), was preferred against the order in W.P.No.31271 of 2016, no interim orders were granted in the Writ Appeal, which is pending on the file of this Court. 5. It is submitted that, suppressing all these facts, respondent No.2 herein, who’s not a party to the writ petition and the contempt case, on the basis of letters of the office of Collector & RDO, Rajanna Sircilla District, lodged a complaint against the petitioner, on the ground that petitioner misguided the High Court and obtained the order(s). 5. It is submitted that, suppressing all these facts, respondent No.2 herein, who’s not a party to the writ petition and the contempt case, on the basis of letters of the office of Collector & RDO, Rajanna Sircilla District, lodged a complaint against the petitioner, on the ground that petitioner misguided the High Court and obtained the order(s). It is further submitted that the High Court, declared the petitioner, “as eligible to receive the benefits under the R&R Policy and petitioner’s family was a separate family as per G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW.L.A. IV R & R) Department, dated 08.04.2005, and directed respondents to include name of petitioner in beneficiary list of Project Displaced Families.” 6. It is pointed out that the respondents i.e., Collector and RDO in the writ petition, instead of complying with the directions of the Court, initiated the criminal proceedings by addressing letters to the office of Tahsildar. That, the Tahsildar, Vemulawada, addressed letter No.E/992/2024, dated 05.11.2024 (annexed at page No.8), to the Station House Officer, Police Station Vemulawada, to book a case against petitioner/accused. It is contended that respondent No.2 has lodged the complaint on the instigation of official respondents (Collector and RDO) in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 to withdraw the contempt case and hence, is an abuse of process of law. 7. It is submitted that the act of the Tahsildar in filing a complaint and initiating criminal proceedings against the petitioner are improper and the proceedings in Crime (FIR) No.592 of 2024 be quashed. 8. Narration of Events: A writ petition bearing No.31271 of 2016 was filed, this Court allowed the writ petition vide order dated 22.11.2023. For non-compliance of orders in writ petition, C.C.No.1937 of 2024 came to be filed (filed on 19.09.2024), a writ appeal bearing No.688 of 2024 was preferred (filed on 06.06.2024), no interim orders were passed in the writ appeal. Pending writ appeal and contempt case, Criminal Proceedings were initiated on the ground that the writ petitioner (Petitioner/accused herein) obtained the order in writ petition on the ground that she has mislead the Court, (in fact this issue is to be considered by this High Court in the writ appeal which is pending, if the said ground is raised). The following events lead to the filing of the criminal petition. 9. The following events lead to the filing of the criminal petition. 9. Petitioner/accused herein filed a writ petition bearing No.31271 of 2016 with the following prayer: “...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents for non inclusion of petitioner's name in Project Displaced Families beneficiary List of Anupuram Village, Vemulawada Mandal, Karimnagar District which is coming under submergence of Mid Manair Reservoir for providing R and R Policy benefits in terms of G.O.Ms. No. 68, Irrigation and CAD (Project Wing- LA IV R and R) Department, dated 08-04-2005 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to above G.O.Ms.No.68, Irrigation and CAD Department, dated 08.04.2005 and consequently direct the respondents to extend all the benefits under R and R policy in terms of G.O.Ms.No.68, Irrigation and CAD (Project Wing - LA IV R and R) Department dated 08.04.2005 to the petitioner..." 10. A learned Single Judge of this Court vide order, dated 22.11.2023, in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 held as follows: “5. The learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for the respondents basing on the counter submits that as per Para 5.4 (a) of State R&R Policy, 2005 issued in G.O.Ms.No.68, 1 & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R) Department, dated 08.04.2005, the members of the families who are permanently residing, practicing any trade, occupation or vocation in the Project Affected Area are eligible for the benefit under R & R Policy. Therefore the members of the families who are not permanently residing in the Project Affected Areas are not eligible for the other benefits for loss of livelihood etc., under the R & R Policy except the value of their structures. 6. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents further submits that after conducting detailed survey as per the guide lines of G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R) Department, dated 08.04.2005 the eligible PDF/PAF list of Anupuram Village consisting (1091) families is published vide Gazette No.67, dated 29.12.2009. 6. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents further submits that after conducting detailed survey as per the guide lines of G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R) Department, dated 08.04.2005 the eligible PDF/PAF list of Anupuram Village consisting (1091) families is published vide Gazette No.67, dated 29.12.2009. But the writ petitioner name not included in socio- economic survey list published vide Gazette No.67, dated 29.12.2009 as she was already married before conducting of the socio-economic survey, and it is known that the petitioner is living in Peddalingapoor Village of Ellanthakunta Mandal with her husband and children but her mother and father Smt. Vanapatla Padma and Sri Jalapathi Reddy names were included in socio-economic survey list at Gazette Sl. No.733, H.No.7-12 and her mother also given patta certificate and wages. As such the petitioner is not entitle for any benefits under R & R Policy, G.O.Ms.No.68 dated 08.04.2005 and requested to dismiss the writ petition. 7. After hearing both sides and on perusing the records, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is the owner and possessor of the house bearing No.4-37/1, (MMRP H.No.7-13) situated at Anupuram Village, Vemulawada Mandal, Karimnagar District. The Land Acquisition- Authorities estimated the amount towards Land Acquisition compensation to the house bearing No.4- 37/1, (MMRP H.No.7-13) and also paid the amount to the petitioner. But not included the name of the petitioner and included the names of the parents of the petitioner, who are resided at house bearing No.7-12 for providing benefits under R & R policy in G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R) Department, dated 08.04.2005. According to counter submitted by the respondents, it is noticed that only basing on the names of the petitioner's parents in the Socio-Economic Survey list, the petitioner's name was not included and contended that the respondents came to know that the petitioner's family was not resided at Anupuram Village, which is under submergence of Mid Manair Reservoir is contrary to the records of the Land Acquisition proceedings. Admittedly, the respondent-authorities issued estimated compensation to the petitioner's house bearing No.4-37/1, (MMRP H.No.7-13) in separate proceedings as she is the owner of the house. In view of the same, the petitioner's family is eligible to get the benefits under R & R policy in G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW. LA. Admittedly, the respondent-authorities issued estimated compensation to the petitioner's house bearing No.4-37/1, (MMRP H.No.7-13) in separate proceedings as she is the owner of the house. In view of the same, the petitioner's family is eligible to get the benefits under R & R policy in G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R) Department, dated 08.04.2005 as project displaced family of Anupuram Village, Vemulawada Mandal, Karimnagar District. 8. In view of the above findings, this writ petition/is allowed by declaring that the petitioner is eligible to receive the benefits under R & R policy as the petitioner's family is a separate family under the definition of the 'Project Displaced Family' as per G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R) Department, dated 08.04.2005. Therefore, the respondents are directed to include the name of the petitioner in the beneficiary list of Project Displaced Families of Anupuram Village, Vemulawada Mandal of erstwhile Karimnagar District and pay the benefits under the said scheme as per the procedure laid down in the scheme and further directed to comply the above direction within eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.” 11. A Writ Appeal bearing No.688 of 2024 was preferred on 06.06.2024, no interim orders were granted. 12. A contempt case was filed for non-compliance of the orders in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 on 19.09.2024. As on date, both the writ appeal and the contempt case are pending on the file of this Court. (This criminal petition is (filed on 13.12.2024) to quash the proceedings in Crime No. 592 of 2024 (FIR Registered on 05.11.2024) on the file of Vemulawada Town Police Station for offence under Section 420 ). 13. The Events which occurred prior to the registering of FIR need to be noted. 14(i). A letter dated 16.10.2024 was addressed by Collector and District Magistrate of Rajanna Sircilla District to the Revenue Divisional Officer (for short ‘RDO’). The contents of letter are as follows: “Attention is invited to the reference cited, you are required to submit the following documents in case of Vanaptla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy, in her affidavit in C.C.No.1937 of 2024. 1. The contents of letter are as follows: “Attention is invited to the reference cited, you are required to submit the following documents in case of Vanaptla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy, in her affidavit in C.C.No.1937 of 2024. 1. She is claiming that, she is resident of Anupuram Village of Vemulawada Rural Mandal and it is appears to be fraud for taking advantage of Land Acquisition amount by creating encumbrance, you are required to submit details of Voter ID, F.P. Shop details and Ration card, building permission of the complainant and her husband. 2. Encumbrance of house no. connected link document shall be submit of converting the land and building in her name. which is claimed to be her property in Anupuram Village. You are required to submit original documents of files, this details should reached to the under signed by 05.00 PM on 17.10.2024.” 14(ii). On the very same day, Office of RDO Vemulawada addressed a letter to Tahsildar, Vemulawada, as “Top Priority/Most Urgent”. Contents of the letter are as follows: “Attention is invited to the reference cited, it is submit to that, the District Collector, Rajanna Siricilla has requested to submit the documents as follows: Smt Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jaganmohan Reddy She is Calming the is resident of Annupuram Village of Vemulwada Rural Mandal and it is appears to be fraud for taking advantage of Land Acquisition amount by the creating encumbrance, you required to submit details of Voter Id, F.P Shop details and Ration Card and building permission of the complainant and her husband Therefore, it is instructed to submit the detailed report along with FSC Card, Voter ID and Building permission Documents for taking further necessary action in the matter.” 14(iii). On receipt of the letter from the office of RDO, a letter is addressed on the next day by Tahsildar, Vemulawada Mandal to RDO. Following are the contents of the letter: “I invite kind attention to the reference cited, wherein the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada has instructed to submit the documents like Voter card/Ration card/House documents of Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy. Following are the contents of the letter: “I invite kind attention to the reference cited, wherein the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada has instructed to submit the documents like Voter card/Ration card/House documents of Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy. In this regard I submit that, Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy R/o Karimnagar has personally appear before me today and she has submitted some documents in her support and on perusal of the estimation letter submitted by the Executive Engineer, P.R.I. Jagtial Lr.No.DB3/MMR/ANUPURAM/2010, Dt.19.03.2010 her name was entered at Sl.No.468 with house number 7-13 and on porusal of the award passed by the Special Deputy Collector, LA, Unit-VI, Karimnagar an amount of Rs.5,87,291/-(Rupees Five lakhs eighty seven thousand two hundred and ninety one only). Further I submit that, I have requested to submit Voter card/Ration card pertains to Anupuram village on this she has stated that, she has no voter card/ration card pertains to Anupuram village and she refused to give the sworn statement that she is not having voter card/ration card or any other documents which proofs that she is the villager of Anupuram village. Further I submit that, I have conducted enquiry with the village elders of Anupuram village and it is revealed that, she is having only one house in the village, but she never resided in the village only her mother and father is resided in the said house and due to which his mother and father got one plot in newly formed Anupuram R &R colony.” 14(iv). Another letter dated 24.10.2024, emanated from the Office of Collector Addressed to RDO. The contents of the letter are as follows: “Attention is invited to the references cited, the District Collector, Rajanna Sircilla has instructed to file Civil and Criminal proceedings to be immediately started” as per the findings of the RDO, Vemulawada…” 15. Pending contempt and writ appeal, Tahsildar, Vemulawada, addressed a letter No.E/992/2024, dated 05.11.2024 (annexed at page No.8), to the Station House Officer, Police Station Vemulawada. In the reference, two letters are referred to. One bearing No.G2/73/2024 dated 24.10.2024 of Collector, Rajanna Sircilla District, and the other letter bearing No.A/793/2024 of the RDO, Vemulawada, dated 16.10.2024. Inviting the attention of the Station House Officer to the letters referred (copies enclosed to the letter dated 05.11.2024), a request was made by the Tahsildar to book a case against the petitioner/accused herein. One bearing No.G2/73/2024 dated 24.10.2024 of Collector, Rajanna Sircilla District, and the other letter bearing No.A/793/2024 of the RDO, Vemulawada, dated 16.10.2024. Inviting the attention of the Station House Officer to the letters referred (copies enclosed to the letter dated 05.11.2024), a request was made by the Tahsildar to book a case against the petitioner/accused herein. The following are the contents of the letter: “Your attention is invited to the references cited, while enclosing the references, you are requested to book a case against Smt.Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy on allegation that, she has misguided the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 to get the R&R benefits illegally as she is never resided in Anupuram village, her parents constructed a house in the name of Smt.Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy with MMRP H.No.7-13 in Anupuram village and she get the compensation for that house. She is having no evidences with her to prove that she is residing in Anupuram village. Therefore you are requested to book a case against Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy for misguide the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana to get the R&R benefits from Government illegally and submit the FIR copy to the undersigned.” 16. Pursuant to the letter from Tahsildar, the Station House Officer, Vemulawada, registered an FIR on 05.11.2024 for an offence under Section 420 of IPC against the petitioner/accused. 17. This Court perused the letter, dated 5.11.2024, and the order of learned Single Judge dated 22.11.2023, annexed at page No.9 of this criminal petition. It is observed from the order of the learned Single Judge that petitioner/accused herein was found eligible to get benefits of R&R and that her name was directed to be included in the name of beneficiary list of project displaced families. The order of the learned Single Judge was not implemented. A contempt case came to be filed for non- compliance of the order. When queried, it is informed by the counsel for petitioner that contempt case is pending as on date (24.04.2025). 18. The order of the learned Single Judge was not implemented. A contempt case came to be filed for non- compliance of the order. When queried, it is informed by the counsel for petitioner that contempt case is pending as on date (24.04.2025). 18. This Court, having perused the material on record, cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that it was Collector (Head of the District Administration) who on his own volition, without any jurisdiction initiated steps to set the criminal law into motion, in spite of the writ petition order having found the petitioner eligible and having not complied the order of learned single judge. This undoubtedly fulfills the parameters of an act which is grave and willful in nature, which cannot be condoned. 19. This Court, having considered the entire factual matrix of the case and the submissions of the counsel for petitioner/accused, initially was of the opinion whether it is a fit case for initiating suo motu contempt proceedings against the office of Collector for directing criminal proceedings against petitioner/accused without any basis. This Court appointed learned Senior Counsel Mr. Avinash Desai as an amicus for assisting in the facts of the case, to arrive at a finding whether acts of the office of Collector amount are willful in nature (in spite of the orders of the writ Court) and for setting the criminal law into motion, thereby violating freedom of life and liberty of the petitioner/accused guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 20. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Avinash Desai submitted at length and invited the attention of this Court to various provisions of the Contempt of Court Act, Articles of Constitution and the Contempt Rules including the Hon’ble Apex Court’s judgments for invoking suo motu contempt proceedings. This Court appreciates the assistance afforded by the learned Senior Counsel. 21. Be that as it may, weighing the nature and gravity of the issues on hand, this Court requested learned Additional Advocate General to appear in this matter. 22. It is submitted by learned Additional Advocate General that there were a large number of cases of the nature as prayed for in writ petition, where benefits were doled out. That on enquiry, it came to light that certain individuals/citizens not entitled for benefits were granted benefits. Hence, office of Collector initiated steps to uncover such wrongful beneficiaries. 22. It is submitted by learned Additional Advocate General that there were a large number of cases of the nature as prayed for in writ petition, where benefits were doled out. That on enquiry, it came to light that certain individuals/citizens not entitled for benefits were granted benefits. Hence, office of Collector initiated steps to uncover such wrongful beneficiaries. It is further submitted that writ petitions filed by ineligible individuals came to be dismissed. 23. It is submitted by the Additional Advocate General that in the case of the petitioner/accused, Writ Petition bearing No.31271 of 2016 filed by her was allowed with certain directions and that a Writ Appeal bearing No.688 of 2024 was preferred and is pending consideration on the file of the Court and a contempt case filed against the District Collector for non implementation of the order of High Court in Writ Petition is pending on the file of the High Court as on date. 24. While the Additional Advocate General was being heard on the issue, a learned counsel Mr. Suresh Ram sought permission of this Court to make submissions on behalf of Collector. This Court was under the impression that Mr. Suresh Ram was a Government Pleader and permitted. It was contended by learned counsel (Mr. Suresh Ram) that this Court has erred in law in initiating contempt proceedings against the Collector. Counsel argued vehemently (without filing Vakalat) placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in T he State of Uttar Pradesh and others v. Association of Retired Supreme Court and High Court Judges at Allahabad and others , [MANU/SC/0003/2024] . The counsel fell in error in making submissions, as if this Court has initiated contempt proceedings against collector. Till date, this Court has not initiated contempt proceedings. Having heard the counsel, this Court made it clear to him, that it was premature on his part to address on the issue, as this Court was only contemplating to initiate contempt proceedings, but did not initiate any such proceedings. This Court is not inclined to accept the contentions raised by the learned counsel appearing independently without there being a vakalat, when the Additional Advocate General has been making submissions by appearing on behalf of Collector and the other officers. 25. This Court is conscious of the fact that Collector and RDO were not arrayed as parties to the criminal petition by the petitioner/accused. 25. This Court is conscious of the fact that Collector and RDO were not arrayed as parties to the criminal petition by the petitioner/accused. It was submitted by the counsel for petitioner/accused that the offices of Collector and RDO were instrumental in driving the office of Tahsildar to address a letter to the SHO requesting to book a case. Having considered the submissions made, having perused the record, it is apparent from the facts that the freedom of life and liberty, of the petitioner/accused, guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution of India was at stake, and setting the criminal law into motion without any basis. Hence, this Court requested the Collector to be present in the Court. 26. Learned Additional Advocate General requested this Court not to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against the offices of Collector and other authorities. He sought time for filing counter affidavit. Having heard the Learned Additional Advocate General, this Court with a view to grant an opportunity, for better adjudication, as to whether the acts of the Head of the District Administration (Collector) and its officers were bona fide acts or acts willful in nature, granted time for filing of counter affidavit for narrating the events and explain the circumstances. 27. A counter affidavit came to be filed explaining the circumstances under which the Office of Collector had to initiate steps. The following are the contents of the counter affidavit filed. “5. I submit that I have the utmost respect for all the orders passed by the Hon'ble Courts, especially those issued passed by the Hon'ble High Court. As a public servant, I consider it my solemn duty to uphold and implement the directives of the Hon'ble judiciary. I respectfully submit that I have not violated any orders issued by this Hon'ble High Court. Specifically, I affirm that I have complied with Your Lordship's orders dated 22/11/2023, passed in WP No. 31271 of 2016 by the Hon'ble High Court, Hyderabad and in the event of any of my acts of omission or commission were to be construed as acts of disobedience of the orders of this Honourable Court, I hereby tender my unconditional apology for the same. 6. It is respectfully submitted that Hon'ble High Court has passed the following order in WP No. 31271 of 2016 dated 22/11/2023 and the operative portion is extracted hereunder as: a...... "8. 6. It is respectfully submitted that Hon'ble High Court has passed the following order in WP No. 31271 of 2016 dated 22/11/2023 and the operative portion is extracted hereunder as: a...... "8. In view of the above findings, this Writ petition is allowed by declaring that the petitioner is eligible to receive the benefits under R & R policy as the petitioner's family is a separate family under the definition of the Project Displaced Family' as per G.O.Ms. No.68, 1 & CAD (PW, LA. IV R & R) Department, dated 08.04.2005. Therefore, the respondents are directed to include the name of the petitioner in the beneficiary list of Project Displaced Families of Anupuram Village, Vemulawada Mandal of erstwhile Karimnagar District and pay the benefits under the said scheme as per the procedure laid down in the scheme and further directed to comply the above direction within eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs". 7. I respectfully submit that I have ordered the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulwada to file Civil and Criminal Proceedings against the petitioner in the Said C.C on dt. 22-10-2024, accordingly the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada directed the Tahsildar to file FIR vide his Lr.No.A/793/2024, dt.26-10-2024, in turn Tahsildar, Vemulawada has filed FIR No.592/2024, dt.05-11-2024 against the petitioner that she has "misguided" the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 to get the R&R Benefits illegally as she is never resided in Anpuram village; this aspect and usage of the word "misguided" along with all relevant material ought to have been placed before the Division Bench in the Writ Appeal preferred by the State; there was no disrespect meant towards either the orders of this Hon'ble Court or towards the Hon'ble Court. The three letters that led to the institution of the Criminal Case are annexed herewith for the kind perusal of this Honourable Court. It is most respectfully submitted that the first two letters did not contain the word "misguided" but only by way of inadvertence the said word was incorporated in the third letter dt.05.11.2024; it is once again most respectfully reiterated that the said word was not used either in respect of the orders or in respect of the Honourable Court. 8. It is most respectfully submitted that the first two letters did not contain the word "misguided" but only by way of inadvertence the said word was incorporated in the third letter dt.05.11.2024; it is once again most respectfully reiterated that the said word was not used either in respect of the orders or in respect of the Honourable Court. 8. I respectfully submit that I am the 2nd Respondent in the above Contempt Case, serving in the capacity of District Collector, Rajanna Sircilla District, having assumed charge on 16th June 2024 from my predecessor. In compliance with Your Lordships' orders, I have reviewed the office records and I have issued an Lr.No.G2/73/2024,dated 08/01/2025 to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulwada, Rajanna Sircilla District particularly to Respondent No.3, directing to process and disburse the benefits as per the prescribed procedure and compliance to add the Petitioner, Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha, to the beneficiaries list under the "Project Displaced Families" scheme for Anupuram Village, Vemulwada Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District, Telangana. Copy of the letter dt.08.01.2025 is enclose herewith for the kind perusal of this Honourable Court. 9. I respectfully submit that, The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada has submitted the Proposal to provide R&R Package vide his office Lr.No.A/616/2024, dt. 17-03-2025, Accordingly the same was submitted to R&R Commissioner, Hyderabad vide Lr.No.G2/73/2024, dt. 18-03-2025. 10. In view there of your lordship's order dated 22/11/2023 in the above W.P.No.31271 of 2016 has been complied by me and in my respectful submission does not require institution of Criminal case proceedings or the same to be continued. 11. I respectfully submit that I have always held the highest regard and utmost respect for the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court and have diligently strived to ensure their timely implementation. I further state that I have never acted with any intention to disregard, disobey, or dishonor the orders of this Hon'ble Court, whether willfully or otherwise. However, if this Hon'ble Court concludes that there has been any violation on my part, I humbly and unconditionally tender my sincere apologies. I respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to consider my submission and exonerate me from the Criminal Case proceedings.” 28. Additional counter affidavit is also filed, averments are similar in nature. Contents of the additional counter affidavit are as follows: “4. I respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to consider my submission and exonerate me from the Criminal Case proceedings.” 28. Additional counter affidavit is also filed, averments are similar in nature. Contents of the additional counter affidavit are as follows: “4. I submit that I have the utmost respect for all the orders passed by the Hon'ble Courts, especially those issued passed by the Hon'ble High Court. As a public servant, I consider it my solemn duty to uphold and implement the directives of the Hon'ble judiciary. I respectfully submit that I have not violated any orders issued by this Hon'ble High Court. Specifically, I affirm that I have complied with his Lordship's orders dated 22/11/2023, passed in WP No. 31271 of 2016 by the Hon'ble High Court, Hyderabad and in the event of any of my acts of omission or commission were to be construed as acts of disobedience of the orders of this Honorable Court, I hereby tender my unconditional apology for the same. 5. It is respectfully submitted that Hon'ble High Court has passed the following order in WP No. 31271 of 2016 dated 22/11/2023 and the operative portion is extracted hereunder as: a. "8. In view of the above findings, this Writ petition is allowed by declaring that the petitioner is eligible to receive the benefits under R & R policy as the petitioner's family is a separate family under the definition of the Project Displaced Family' as per G.O.Ms. No.68, 1 & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R) Department, dated 08.04.2005. Therefore, the respondents are directed to include the name of the petitioner in the beneficiary list of Project Displaced Families of Anupuram Village, Vemulawada Mandal of erstwhile Karimnagar District and pay the benefits under the said scheme as per the procedure laid down in the scheme and further directed to comply the above direction within eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs". 6. There shall be no order as to costs". 6. I respectfully submit that the Tahsildar, Ellantakunta vide L.No. C/31/2024 on 21.10.2024 reported that, as per the local enquiry held in the village, the villagers have stated that, Vanapatla Kavitha @ Vade Laxmi w/o Jaganmohan Reddy is recorded as voter at Sl.No.420 Part No. 299 of 30 Manakondur Assembly Constituency and her husband name is also entered at SI.No.419 in this part, her maternal village is Anupuram, and they shifted to Karimnagar for livelihood since 20 years back. Further, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada vide L.No.B/34/2021 dt: 19.10.2024 has reported that, as per the local enquiry held in the village, it is revealed that, the petitioner having only house in the Village, but she never resided in the village, but her parents would reside in the said house and due to which her parent got one plot in the newly Formed Anupuram R&R Colony. The District Panchayat Officer, Rajanna Sircilla has submitted report on 19.10.2024, as per the available records, the ownership of the H.No.4-37 is recorded in the name of Vanapatla Chandraiah s/o Narsimha Reddy during the years 2002-03 & 2003- 04, during the year 2004-05, Mylaram Venkaiah S/o Singaraiah is recorded as owner of the house and Vanapatla Kavitha w/o Jaganmohan Reddy is recorded as owner with H.No.4-37/1 in the year 2007-08 and 2009-10. But, no records are available in the Gram Panchayat/Office, the basis on which the ownership was transferred in the name of Vanapatla Kavitha. 7. But, no records are available in the Gram Panchayat/Office, the basis on which the ownership was transferred in the name of Vanapatla Kavitha. 7. I respectfully submit that, considering the reports of the Tahsildar, Ellantakunta, Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada and the District Panchayat Officer, Rajanna Sircilla, I had come to the conclusion that Smt Vanapatla Kavitha seems to have resorted to case of forgery and criminal conspiracy and misrepresented before the Hon'ble High Court and accordingly Instructed the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada vide L.No. G2/73/2024 dt: 24.10.2024 to file Civil & Criminal proceedings against her, accordingly the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada directed the Tahsildar to file FIR vide his Lr.No.A/793/2024, dt.26-10-2024, in turn Tahsildar, Vemulawada has filed FIR No.592/2024, dt.05-11-2024 against the petitioner that she has "misguided" the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 to get the R&R Benefits illegally as she is never resided in Anpuram village; this aspect and usage of the word "misguided" along with all relevant material ought to have been placed before the Division Bench in the Writ Appeal preferred by the State; there was no disrespect meant towards either the orders of this Hon'ble Court or towards the Hon'ble Court. The three letters that led to the institution of the Criminal Case have already been placed before this Hon'ble Court for the kind perusal of this Honorable Court. It is most respectfully submitted that the first two letters did not contain the word "misguided" but only by way of inadvertence the said word was incorporated in the third letter dt.05.11.2024; it is once again most respectfully reiterated that the said word was not used either in respect of the orders or in respect of the Honorable Court. 8. I respectfully submit that I am the 2nd Respondent in the above Criminal Petition, serving in the capacity of District Collector, Rajanna Sircilla District, having assumed charge on 16th June 2024 from my predecessor. 8. I respectfully submit that I am the 2nd Respondent in the above Criminal Petition, serving in the capacity of District Collector, Rajanna Sircilla District, having assumed charge on 16th June 2024 from my predecessor. In compliance with Your Lordships' orders, I have reviewed the office records and I have issued an Lr.No.G2/73/2024, dated 08/01/2025 to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada, Rajanna Sircilla District particularly to Respondent No.2, directing to process and disburse the benefits as per the prescribed procedure and compliance to add the Petitioner, Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha to the beneficiaries list under the "Project Displaced Families" scheme for Anupuram Village, Vemulwada Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District, Telangana, in spite of as per G.O.Ms.No. 68, I&CADD, dt. 08.04.2005 chapter-V section 5.4 -Every survey shall contain the following village wise information of the project Affe4cted Families. (a)member of families who are permanently residing, practicing any trade, occupation or vocation in the Project Affected Area, (b) Project Affected Families who are likely to lose their house, agricultural land, employment or are alienated wholly or substantially from the main source of their trade/occupation or vocation, (c) Agricultural labour and non-agricultural laboures (d) Project Affected Families who are or were having possession of forest lands in the affected area prior to the 13th day of December, 2005. (e) Vulnerable persons such as the disabled, destitute, orphans, widows, unmarried girls, abandoned women, or persons above fifty years of age, who are not provided or cannot immediately be provided with alternative livelihood, and who are not otherwise covered as part of family. (1) Families that are landless (not having homestead land, agricultural land, or either homestead or agricultural land) and below poverty line, but residing continuously for a period not less than three years in the affected area preceding the date of declaration of the affected area. The applicant is married and the applicant not effected under this section. Despite knowing these facts, I have honored the Hon'ble High Court orders and issued proceedings to the RDO, Vemulawada to extend the benefits subject to outcome of the Writ Appeal. 9. I respectfully submit that, The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada has submitted the Proposal to provide R&R Package vide his office Lr.No.A/616/2024, dt. 17-03-2025, Accordingly the same was submitted to R&R Commissioner, Hyderabad vide Lr.No.G2/73/2024, dt. 9. I respectfully submit that, The Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada has submitted the Proposal to provide R&R Package vide his office Lr.No.A/616/2024, dt. 17-03-2025, Accordingly the same was submitted to R&R Commissioner, Hyderabad vide Lr.No.G2/73/2024, dt. 18-03-2025 and the R&R Commissioner, Hyderabad vide Lr.No. 279/CRR/SS/2011 Dt: 03.2025 has accorded permission to extent the benefits to extend the above R&R benefits as per the G.O. Ms.No. 68, I&CAD (PW. LA.IV R & R) Department, Dt: 08.04.2005 to the Petitioner, Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha. I respectfully submit that, I have issued orders vide Proc. No. G2/73/2024, Dt: 04.04.2025, to authorized to the R&R Officer & RDO, Vemulawada to provide the benefits of the R&R entitlements to the beneficiary i.e., Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy R/o Anupuram Village, VemulawadaMandal. 10. In view there of your lordship's order dated 22/11/2023 in the above W.P.No.31271 of 2016 has been complied by me and in my respectful submission does not require institution of Criminal case proceedings or the same to be continued. 11. I respectfully submit that I have always held the highest regard and utmost respect for the orders passed by this Hon'ble Court and have diligently strived to ensure their timely implementation, I further state that I have never acted with any intention to disregard, disobey, or dishonor the orders of this Hon'ble Court, whether willfully or otherwise. I respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to consider my submission and kindly examine the ground for the pursuance and hardship, I am honest officer for pertaining public interest and close any further proceedings on undersigned. I respectfully state that if the proceedings are directed to be reflected in my ACR (Annual Confidential Report) it would affect my future prospects and hence I humbly request this Hon'ble Court to close the proceedings by accepting my unconditional apology. I have always strived to fulfill the highest standards of honesty and carry out my duties in a dutiful manner. 12. I respectfully submit that as per the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 rule-3(1) Every member of the service shall at all times maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and shall do noting which is unbecoming of a member of the service. 12. I respectfully submit that as per the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 rule-3(1) Every member of the service shall at all times maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and shall do noting which is unbecoming of a member of the service. (1A) Every member of the service shall maintain: (i) high ethical standards, integrity and honesty (ii) political neutrality (iii) promoting of the principles of merit, fairness and impartiality in the discharge of duties (iv) accountability and transparency and as per (2B) (iv) take decisions solely in public interest and use or cause to use public resources efficiently, effectively and economically. In this case I have discharged my duties as per AIS rules and Honorable Court be pleased to close further proceedings in the interest of justice as deemed.” 29. Learned Additional Advocate General placed on record a copy of letter dated 23.04.2025 addressed by the Tahsildar, Vemulawada to SHO which is as follows: “Your attention is invited to the references cited, wherein you are requested to book a criminal case Smt.Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy through the reference 1st cited. Through the reference 2nd cited, the District Collector, Rajanna Sircilla has instructed to withdraw the complaint against Smt.Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy as necessary benefits are being provided to the individual. Accordingly, the complaint which is submitted through the reference 1st cited is hereby withdrawing.” 30. This Court, having perused the counter affidavit and the additional counter filed by the District Collector, is of the opinion that the averments made are self serving in nature. On a perusal of the correspondence between the offices of Collector, RDO and Tahsildar and the letter addressed to SHO by Tahsildar and the letter dated 23.04.2025, that the criminal law was into motion by registering an FIR in spite of the High Court finding the petitioner/accused eligible for benefits and directing the authorities to consider the petitioner as project displaced family (directions of this Court in W.P.No.31271 of 2016, by order dated 22.11.2023). 31. From the contents of letter date 23.04.2025 it is apparent that necessary benefits were being granted to the petitioner/accused, after setting the criminal law into motion, to get over the acts which evidently are willful in nature and without any basis of law. 32. 31. From the contents of letter date 23.04.2025 it is apparent that necessary benefits were being granted to the petitioner/accused, after setting the criminal law into motion, to get over the acts which evidently are willful in nature and without any basis of law. 32. From the letter dated 16.10.2024 of the Collector and District Magistrate, it is evident from the contents, that the Collector was of the opinion that a fraud was played taking advantage of the land acquisition amount by creating encumbrance. It is further observed that Collector specifically stated that files should reach by 05:00 p.m. on 17.10.2024. It is also a fact which is borne on record that on the very same day, office of RDO addressed a letter to Tahsildar which reflected the contents of the letter of collector verbatim. Letter dated 24.10.2024, was addressed from the office of District Collector to the RDO, the contents of letter are extracted supra. 33. In the letter dated 24.10.2024 from office of District Collector, District Collector has instructed to file civil and criminal proceedings immediately as per the findings of RDO, Vemulawada, submitted vide reference dated 22.10.2024. Undeniably, the FIR lodged is on the basis of the letter addressed on 24.10.2024 by the office of Collector. This is the root cause and the genesis of the letter dated 05.11.2024 of Tahsildar, Vemulawada, to the Station House Officer and it is on the basis of this letter dated 05.11.2024, FIR came to be registered. 34. A query was put to learned Additional Advocate General as to how the Collector upon himself can initiate civil and criminal proceedings without any authority of law, in spite of the order in the writ petition, a contempt case pending on the file of this Court, a writ appeal which is also pending and there being no interim order in the writ appeal (in favour of the appellant-State). Learned Additional Advocate General pleaded that the officer has tendered an apology unconditionally in the counter affidavit. 35. In the present facts and circumstances of the case, on perusal of the record, it is apparent that District Collector/Executive Head of the District Administration has not only displayed a disregard to the Rule of Law by his acts, but, tried to circumvent the orders of Court of law, by directing his officers to initiate civil and criminal proceedings. 35. In the present facts and circumstances of the case, on perusal of the record, it is apparent that District Collector/Executive Head of the District Administration has not only displayed a disregard to the Rule of Law by his acts, but, tried to circumvent the orders of Court of law, by directing his officers to initiate civil and criminal proceedings. This Court is not inclined to delve or consider any grounds raised in the other pending proceedings before this Court. Criminal proceedings initiated on the basis of the District Collector’s letter dated 24.10.2024 is the concern of this Court, but, for which FIR would not have been registered. 36. Complaint is made by Tahsildar, by way of a communication to SHO dated 05.11.2024. Offence under section 420 is registered in crime no. 592 of 2024 on the file of Vemulawada Town Police Station. Section 420 is as follows: “ 420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property .—Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.” 37. A Three Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in A.M. Mohan v. The State Represented By SHO And Another (SLP (Criminal) No. 9598 of 2022) dealing with Section 420 of IPC held as follows: “This Court, in the case of Prof. R.K. Vijayasarathy and Another v. Sudha Seetharam and Another , [ (2019) 16 SCC 739 ] has culled out the ingredients to constitute the offence under Sections 415 and 420 of IPC, as under: “ 15 . Section 415 of the Penal Code reads thus: “ 415 . Cheating. R.K. Vijayasarathy and Another v. Sudha Seetharam and Another , [ (2019) 16 SCC 739 ] has culled out the ingredients to constitute the offence under Sections 415 and 420 of IPC, as under: “ 15 . Section 415 of the Penal Code reads thus: “ 415 . Cheating. —Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to “cheat”.” 16 . The ingredients to constitute an offence of cheating are as follows: 16.1 . There should be fraudulent or dishonest inducement of a person by deceiving him: 16.1.1 . The person so induced should be intentionally induced to deliver any property to any person or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or 16.1.2 . The person so induced should be intentionally induced to do or to omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived; and 16.2 . In cases covered by 16.1.2. above, the act or omission should be one which caused or is likely to cause damage or harm to the person induced in body, mind, reputation or property. 17 . A fraudulent or dishonest inducement is an essential ingredient of the offence. A person who dishonestly induces another person to deliver any property is liable for the offence of cheating. 18 . Section 420 of the Penal Code reads thus: “420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property .— Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.” 19 . The ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 420 are as follows: 19.1 . The ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 420 are as follows: 19.1 . A person must commit the offence of cheating under Section 415; and 19.2 . The person cheated must be dishonestly induced to (a) deliver property to any person; or (b) make, alter or destroy valuable security or anything signed or sealed and capable of being converted into valuable security. 20 . Cheating is an essential ingredient for an act to constitute an offence under Section 420 .” 12 . A similar view has been taken by this Court in the cases of Archana Rana v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another , [ (2021) 3 SCC 751 : 2021 INSC 135] , Deepak Gaba and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, and Mariam Fasihuddin and Another v. State by Adugodi Police Station and Another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 58 : 2024 INSC 49 . 13. It could thus be seen that for attracting the provision of Section 420 of IPC, the FIR/complaint must show that the ingredients of Section 415 of IPC are made out and the person cheated must have been dishonestly induced to deliver the property to any person; or to make, alter or destroy valuable security or anything signed or sealed and capable of being converted into valuable security. In other words, for attracting the provisions of Section 420 of IPC, it must be shown that the FIR/complaint discloses: (i) the deception of any person; (ii) fraudulently or dishonestly inducing that person deliver any property to any person; and (iii) dishonest intention of the accused at the time of making inducement.” 38. On a perusal of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court, it is apparent that the fraudulent and dishonest inducement of any person has to make out from inception. 39. In the present case the High Court on facts held that the petitioner/accused was eligible for R&R benefits and directed to be declared eligible to be a member of Project Displaced Families. In spite of the High Court holding that the petitioner is eligible for grant of R&R benefits, criminal law has been set into motion on the ground that petitioner has misguided the Court and obtained order. In fact the word fraud has been used in the letters of the offices of district administration and an offence under Section 420 is registered. 40. In fact the word fraud has been used in the letters of the offices of district administration and an offence under Section 420 is registered. 40. It defies the logic of this Court as to how the office of District Collector can afford to conclude in such manner, when it is evident from the order of the High Court that the petitioner was found eligible for R&R benefits and the direction to include the name of the petitioner/accused in the list of Project Displaced Families beneficiary list. It is an overreach by the office of District Collector, impermissible under law, District Collector traversed beyond the orders of this High Court and in fact without jurisdiction. No Offence is be made out from the facts and circumstances of the case. 41. This is sheer abuse of process of law, the office of District Collector acted contrary to known facets of law by directing to register a criminal case. 42. It is brought to the notice of this Court the criminal proceedings initiated have been withdrawn. It is a clear case of non adherence to Rule of Law. The fact that proceedings were withdrawn is indicative enough that the office of District Collector has acted in disregard to Rule of Law curbing the freedom of life and liberty in a manner unknown to law. 43. The Office of District Collector ignored the fact of pending contempt proceedings and pending Writ Appeal on the file of this High Court and issued such directions, which are impermissible under law. The point which needs to be considered is, what is/where is the genesis of the criminal proceedings. 44. This Court is conscious of the fact that this is a Criminal Petition filed under Section 528 of BNS (Sec: 482 Cr.P.C). Section 528 in Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is as follows: “ 528. Saving of inherent powers of High Court Nothing in this Sanhita shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Sanhita, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.” 45. Question which further falls for consideration is what amounts to, an abuse of process of law, in the present facts of the case. Question which further falls for consideration is what amounts to, an abuse of process of law, in the present facts of the case. The high Court by its order in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 dated 22.11.2023 held that the accused/petitioner herein is an eligible person to receive R&R benefits. Whether the act of initiating criminal proceedings on the basis of instructions of District Collector (arrayed as a party in the writ petition), without complying the order of learned Single Judge curtailing the freedom of life and liberty, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, is bona fide. 46. The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of BNSS is to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. It is an inherent power to be exercised to secure ends of justice in a given case. Once a complaint is lodged and an FIR is registered, Criminal law is set in motion. In other words, the complaint is the genesis for criminal law to be set into motion. The basis of the complaint is not bona fide, act or acts of District Collector and authorities directing to initiate criminal proceedings definitely amounts to abuse of process of Court, impacting the life and liberty of individual, violating Art 21 of The Constitution of India. The criminal petition deserves to be allowed. The genesis undoubtedly is on the basis of directions emanating from the office of District Collector. 47. Good governance is the hall mark of the offices of State Government, Officers manning the district administration, cannot initiate criminal proceedings, without there being any basis as required under law. Issuing directions to initiate civil and criminal proceedings curbing the freedom of life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of Constitution of India is not a bona fide act. 48. Rule of Law is supreme, no officer of State Government can initiate proceedings in disregard of Rule of Law, if such violations are permitted, it would be antithesis to Rule of Law and such acts are impermissible under law, they need deterrent action. 49. Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that necessary benefits are being provided to individual and FIR registered on 15.11.2024 for the offence under Section 420 of IPC are withdrawn. Learned Additional Advocate General quoted: “To Err is Human, To Forgive is Divine.” 50. This Court takes note of the quote. 49. Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that necessary benefits are being provided to individual and FIR registered on 15.11.2024 for the offence under Section 420 of IPC are withdrawn. Learned Additional Advocate General quoted: “To Err is Human, To Forgive is Divine.” 50. This Court takes note of the quote. But, whether the acts of head of the district administration of a district are mere mistakes or errors committed inadvertently or in disregard to Rule of Law have to be determined from the facts and circumstances of the case. Acts perpetrated are grave in nature, as held supra, are not bona fide, such acts if permitted to go unchecked in a democratic set up, would lead to chaos, upsetting the very fabric of the democratic society. District Administration has to be responsible and function within the bounds of law, any overreach would not only be an impediment for efficient and effective administration, but would also erode the faith of citizens in a democratic setup. 51. Having considered the entire factual matrix of the case this Court is of the opinion that the office of Chief Secretary for the State of Telangana, shall take note of the acts committed by the District Collector, which exhibit a disregard for Rule of Law, this Court expresses its strong displeasure of such acts of District Collector which curtailed the life and liberty of petitioner/accused for reasons unknown to law, violating Article 21 of The Constitution of India. This Court deems it appropriate that the office of Chief Secretary be directed to reprimand the District Collector, so that he restrains himself in future from committing such acts. Initially, this Court was inclined to take a firm action, but, it restrains itself keeping in view the long tenure of the Officer. The Chief Secretary is directed reprimand the officer, as held supra. 52. This Court appreciates the submissions made by the Additional Advocate General, yet, in the facts and circumstances, this Court cannot ignore the acts of district collector directing respondent No.2, through the offices of RDO to initiate civil and criminal proceedings against the petitioner/accused. This Court also expresses its deep appreciation for the assistance rendered by the Learned Senior Counsel Avinash Desai. 53. Office no less than that of District Collector, Head, District Administration, played a pivotal role and is instrumental in initiating the criminal proceedings. This Court also expresses its deep appreciation for the assistance rendered by the Learned Senior Counsel Avinash Desai. 53. Office no less than that of District Collector, Head, District Administration, played a pivotal role and is instrumental in initiating the criminal proceedings. It reflects the office of District Collector in poor light. Disrespect for Rule of Law and the orders of this Court, is apparent from the facts and the acts. Acts perpetrated shocks the conscience of this Court, nothing more is to be penned. 54. For reasons aforesaid, the Criminal Petition deserves to be allowed. Proceedings in Crime (FIR) No.592 of 2024 on the file of Vemulawada Town Police Station, Rajanna Sircilla District, registered for offence under Section 420 of IPC vide FIR dated 05.11.2024 deserves to be quashed. 55. Be that as it may, as it is informed to this Court that the criminal proceedings initiated are withdrawn, no orders are required to be passed. Criminal Petition stands allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.