IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5143 OF 2025 Between: P.Gopala Krishna, S/o P.Hanumanthappa, aged 35 years. Farmer, R/o H.No. 6-89, Kosigi village and Mandal, Kurnool district. A-2 ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Station House Officer, Aspari Police Station, Kurnool district. 3. Jogi Anjinaiah, S/o Rangappa, aged 39 years, Karumanchi village, Aspari Mandal, Kurnool district ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS[482 Cr.PC], praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the Charge sheet in PRC No. 07/2023 on the file of Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Alur in Cr. No. 83/2023 of Aspari Police Station based on 161(3) statements of LWs 1 to 4 as being devoid of truth, baseless, self-contradictory, contrary to the confession cum seizure & arrest report and arrest Panchanama is improbable and unsustainable. l-A. NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C (Section 528 of BNSS), praying lhat in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Charge sheet vide PRC No. 07/2023 on the file of Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Alur /2024 in Cr. No. 83/2023 of Aspari P.S. pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Kasa Jaganmohan Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (AP) on behalf of the Respondent No’s.1&2 and of M/s V. Sesha Kumari, for the Respondent No.3 The Court made the following: ' ■/ i APHC010242342025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] •I FRIDAY JHE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5143/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED P Gopala Krishna AND ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.KASAJAGANMOHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2.VSESHA KUMARI The Court made the following Order: This Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of BNSS, has been filed by the petitioner/A2 to quash the charge sheet in PRC.No.7 of 2023 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Alur, arising out of Crime No.83 of 2023 of Apsara Police Station. A case .has been registered against the petitioner and others for 2. the offences punishable under Sections 420 read with 34, 489-B read with 511 2 of IPC. Police after conducting investigation filed charge sheet and the same was taken on file as PRC.No.7 of 2023 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Alur. 3. Brief facts of the case are that on 10.07.2023, the defacto complainant filed a report before the police stating that, the 1®* accused told him that if he gave one lakh rupees, he would be give three lakh rupees in fake currency in return. Subsequently, the friend of the 1®' accused took the mobile phone from defacto complainant, while the accused Nos.2 and 3 took cash of Rs.4,00,000/- from him and also took amount of Rs.23,00,000/- from the person who accompanied with 1®* accused. They then handed over a bag by informing that the said bag contains fake currency notes. However, when the defacto complainant opened the bag, he found that he had been cheated by accused 1 to 3. Upon that, the defacto complainant has resorted in filing the present complaint as against the petitioner herein and others. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1 and 2 as well as learned counsel for the respondent No.3. 5. Perused the material on record. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is an apparent error in filing of the complaint. It is submitted that the complaint was lodged after a lapse of 10 months of alleged offence and date of offence is not mentioned and no recovery was made. It is submitted that when the complaint was lodged, the defacto complainant had no knowledge of the petitioner’s // 3 involvement. The petitioner is now being implicated based on the allegation that he was wearing a mask and helmet at the time of the incident. Additionally, it is submitted that the complainant transferred the money to the account of the 1®' accused, and there is no evidence connecting the petitioner with the transfer of money. Furthermore, no witness has identified the petitioner, nor has anyone seen his face during the commission of the alleged offence. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that if the hearsay witnesses were revealed, the occurrence of alleged crime and names of the accused in September, 2022 by LW1 as stated in their 161(3) statement, there is no plausible reason as to why petitioner’s name was not mentioned in the FIR, which was registered more than ten months later. It is submitted that there are material discrepancies in the complaint and Section 161(3) Cr.P.C. statement recorded on the same day. It is also submitted that in the complaint dated 10.07.2023, the defacto complainant stated that he was deceived by accused No.3 and his two friends of Siriguppa. It is submitted that there is no cogent evidence of the petitioner meeting the complainant with other accused except his own brother to attract Section 34 of IPC and 511. 8. On the contrary, the learned counsel for the respondent No.3 submits that the accused 1 to 4 have conspired and cheated the defacto complainant with a common intention by formulating a plan to substitute original currency notes in place of so-called "black" currency notes. It is further submitted that the accused had specific knowledge regarding counterfeit 4 currency and were well aware of its nature and implications. It is submitted that the accused Nos.1 and 2 already having criminal back ground in the same type of offence in Guntakal II Town Police Station vide Crime No.263 2021, for alleged offences under Sections 420, 406, IPC. of 120(B) read with 34 of 9. The learned counsel for the respondent No.3 further submits that accused Nos.1 and 2 went to Siriguppa in motor cycle and accused Nos.3 and 4 along with defacto complainant went in a car. The defacto complainant handed over ?4,00,000 to Accused Nos. 1 and 2. and 2 gave him a bag, claiming it contained black In return. Accused Nos.1 currency, and instructed him not to open it. They also took away the cell phones of the defacto and Accused Nos.3 and 4. However, when the defacto opened the bag, he discovered that it complainant complainant later contained only newspapers. Consequently, he lodged a report with the police, which was registered as Crime No. 83 of 2022. After conducting an investigation, the police filed a charge sheet, including the petitioner as one of the accused. All the accused were charged with cheating the complainant with substituting genuine currency notes with counterfeit having knowledge of the counterfeit nature of the a common intention by or fake notes, despite currency. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor too submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent No.3. 10. concurred with the 11. Section 489-B IPC reads as follows. “489-B. Using as genuine, forged or counterfit currency-notes or bank notes.— Whoever sells to, or buys or receives from, any other person othenjvise traffics in or uses as genuine, any forged or counterfeit currency- note or bank-note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.’’ ', or 12. On a plain reading of the entire material, it is evident that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner regarding the receipt of the from the defacto complainant. The only allegation is that the petitioner was purportedly wearing a mask and helmet at the time of the incident. Furthermore, it is undisputed that the complainant transferred the the account of 1®* accused. money money to 13. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, continuation of proceedings as against the petitioner herein and the petitioner to undergo the rigmorale of entire trial would nothing but abuse of process of Court. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in respect of the^T^etittoner herein, in PRC No.7 of 2023 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Alur, is hereby quashed. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand 14. 15. closed. Sd/- M. SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To I' Magistrate of First Class, Alur, Kurnool District 3 One rc District a On! o® Jaganmohan Reddy. Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to M/s V Sesha Kumari, Advocate [OPUCl 5. Two CC to Public Prosecutor Amaravathi. [OUT] 6. Three CD Copies High Court of Andhra Pradesh at MV \ HIGH COURT MV DATED: 09/05/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.5143 of 2025 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION