Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18391 (AP)

NEIL MONTERO alias NEIL MATHEW MONTERIO v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

CRLP/5411/2025 · 2025-05-08

Harinath N

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

M 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5411 OF 2025 Between: 1. Neil Montero @ Neil Mathew Monterio, S/o Mathew Monteiro, aged about 55 years, R/o 936, Jogadayachi Halli, Sanquelim, North Goa, Goa. 2. Samuel Mantero, S/o Mathew Monteiro, aged about 28 years, R/o 936, Jogadayachi Halli, Sanquelim North Goa, Goa. ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No’s. 11 and 12 AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, through inspector of Police, CID, RO, Tirupati, rep by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Amaravati. 2. G.Dasaratha Ramaiah, Sub-Inspector of Police, Chillakur PS, SPSR Nellore Dist. ...RESPONDENT/ DEFACTO-COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to quash the proceedings in FIR.No.53 of 2014 of CID, RO, Tirupati against A11 and A12 r I.A. NO: jQF 2025 "" ^Pptition under Section 528 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the H^h court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in FIR.No.53‘ of 2014 of CID, RO, Tirupati including arrest of the * petitioners/All and A12, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri J Ugranarasimha, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (AP) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 The Court made the following: r APHC010254262025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5411/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) Neil Montero Alias Neil Mathew Monterio and Others AND ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT The State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1.J UGRANARASIMHA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 ORDER- Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners arraigned as accused Nos.11 and 12 in C.C.No.60 of 2017 on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nellore. The petitioners are shown as absconding in the said case and the case was split up in respect of the \ are petitioners herein. It is submitted that during the pendency of the case, accused No.6 passed away and after a full-fledged trial, the learned Magistrate has acquitted the other accused persons, except for the petitioners herein. The against accused Nos.6 and 7 was abated case as they passed away during the pendency of the case. 3. It is submitted that the petitioners were not aware of the pendency of this case and they are residents of Goa. Though the case was split up against the petitioners, there was no summon or notice received from the Court with regard to the pendency of the case. 4. Perused the record and perused the judgment passed in C.C.No.60 of 2017. As seen from the judgment, the learned Magistrate has given a or Police categorical finding that there was no property seized from the accused and that the C.I.D. police had done a faulty investigation and could not prove the connection among A1 to A12, and even storage of illicit liquor by A1 to A5, A9 and A10 was also not established. On these grounds, the accused were acquitted. 3 5. ^ Relegating the matter back to the trial Court against the petitioners would serve no judicial purpose and the contrary is a wastage of time of the Court as well as the prosecution. On these grounds, C.C.No.60 of 2017 on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nellore, against the petitioners is hereby quashed. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. 6. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K KASIRAO ACHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR \ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To. 1. The II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District 2. The Inspector of Police, CID, RO, Tirupati, Chittoor District 3. The Station House Officer, Gudur Police station, SPSR Nellore District 4. One CC to Sri J Ugranarasimha, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CC to Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. [OUT] 6. Three CD Copies MV nm If HIGH COURT DATED: 09/05/2025 Vi \ ORDER CRLP.No.5411 of 2025 ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION