APHC010187632025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3962 OF 2025 Between: 1. V.Ramesh Chandra Babu,, son years, H.No. 12/457/A, Kanchigari Veedhi, Adavani (Adoni) Town and Post, Kurnool District. 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P, Amaravati, Guntur District th House Officer, Adoni II Town, Kurnool District. 2. Begampur Pavan Kumar, son of B.Nagaraj Achari, aged about 33 years, Purohit, H.No.25 Kurnool District Counsel for the Petitioner: V SUREN Counsel for the Respondent(S): PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3962 OF 2025 1. V.Ramesh Chandra Babu,, son of V.Gopalaiah, aged about 51 years, H.No. 12/457/A, Kanchigari Veedhi, Adavani (Adoni) Town and Post, Kurnool District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P, Amaravati, Guntur District through Station House Officer, Adoni II Town, Kurnool District. 2. Begampur Pavan Kumar, son of B.Nagaraj Achari, aged about 33 years, Purohit, H.No.25-5, Nakathi Street, Adoni Town, ...Respondent(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: V SURENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH of V.Gopalaiah, aged about 51 ...Petitioner 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, rough Station 2. Begampur Pavan Kumar, son of B.Nagaraj Achari, aged about ...Respondent(S): 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3962 OF 2025 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) seeking quashment of the proceedings against the petitioner/Accused No.4 in Crime No.37 of 2025 of Adoni II Town Police Station. 2. The allegation of the 2nd respondent is that he advanced a hand loan of Rs.65,00,000/- to one Makam Akhilesh Gupta on 24.01.2025, and upon failure to repay, a civil suit was filed before the Junior Civil Judge (Senior Division), Adoni, wherein an order of attachment before judgment was granted on 23.05.2025. The notice of the suit was served on the defendant therein (A-1) on 29.05.2025. 3. It is the case of the 2nd respondent that in order to defeat the order of attachment, a registered sale deed was executed on 29.01.2025 by the accused and the petitioner herein in favour of a third party, thereby constituting offences under Sections 198, 199(a), 199(b), 223, 318(1), 61(1) r/w 3(5) of BNSS. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not a party to the said civil suit, and there is no 3 material to show that he had knowledge of the pendency of the suit or the order passed therein. It is further submitted that the sale deed was executed prior to the attachment order and even prior to the date on which the summons was served on the defendant in the suit. 5. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, and on perusal of the material on record, it is evident that, the attachment order was passed on 23.05.2025, the summons in the civil suit were served on the defendant (A-1) on 29.05.2025, the sale deed in question was executed on 29.01.2025, i.e., prior to the above dates. 6. In the absence of any cogent material to demonstrate that the petitioner was aware of the pending litigation or the attachment proceedings, and considering that the sale transaction predated both, this Court is of the view that the essential ingredients constituting the alleged offences are not made out, as against the petitioner. 7. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner would amount to abuse of process of law. 4 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of, with a direction that, the Investigating Officer shall proceed in accordance with law, keeping in view the observations made herein and in compliance with Section 35(3) of the BNSS. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date:02.07. 2025 KKV 5 208 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO:3962 OF 2025 Date: 02.07.2025 KKV