Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12977 (AP)

SHAIK ABDUL RAHIMAN @ RAHAMAN v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

CRLP/3368/2025 · 2025-03-28

Harinath N

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010154262025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3368/2025 Between: Shaik Abdul Rahiman @ Rahaman ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. RAMALAKSHMANA REDDY SANEPALLI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION No.3368 OF 2025 ORDER: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arraigned as A.10 in Crime No.131 of 2024 of Macherla Town Police Station, Palnadu District, registered for the alleged offence under Sections 147, 148, 448, 120-B, 307, 440, 447, 427, 323, 506 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner was not involved in the crime and that his name does not appear in the complaint. It is also submitted that A.13, in the present crime, had filed a complaint on 28.02.2024 against the 2nd respondent and others, and as a counterblast, the latter had filed the present complaint on 28.06.2024. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent has filed a private complaint alleging various offences against the petitioner and others. It is submitted that, except for the omnibus allegations, there are no specific allegations against the petitioner. 4. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the 2nd respondent initially filed a complaint with the police but refused to have it registered. Rather than pursuing it there, the 2nd respondent filed a complaint before the learned Magistrate and got it referred to the police station. 3 5. It is also submitted that one of the victims of the alleged incident was sustained injuries which were found to be grievous in nature. The wound certificate, dated 03.09.2024, is placed on record. 6. Considering the same, the Station House Officer, Macharla Town police Station, Palnadu District, to complete the investigation without taking coercive steps against the petitioner in Crime No.131 of 2024. This would not preclude the investigation officer from filing a charge sheet or final report after completion of the investigation. 7. With these observations, the criminal petition is disposed off. 8. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Dt.28.03.2025 BV