IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY ,THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4306 OF 2024 Between: 1. V.M.Surendranatha Reddy, S/o. Ramana Reddy, R/o. D. No. 18-1- 28/5E, K.T. Road, Tirupathi 2. V.M.Lakshmi Devi, W/o. Ramana Reddy, R/o. D. No. 18-1-28/5E, K.T. Road, Tirupathi 3. V.M. Surekha Reddy, D/o. Ramana Reddy, R/o. D. No. 18-1-28/5E, K.T. Road, Tirupathi ...Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1,4 and 8 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amaravati. 2. Vemapalli Mopuri Subhashini, W/o. Prabhakar Reddy, 17/117, Subbireddigari street, Proddutur Town. ...Respondent/Defacto Complainant Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records in C.C No. 252 of 2020 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Proddutur and quash the salTif illegal, arbitrary and abuse of process of law. -'i;. Lfe^O: 2 bF 2024 rs » Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioners/AI, A4 and A8 in C.C. No. 252 of 2020 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Proddutur pending disposal of the above CrI.P. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Smt Aishwarya Nagula, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri Papudippu Sasidhar Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 The Court made the following: APHC010266152024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE [3368] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4306 of 2024 Between; V.m.surendranatha Reddy and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1.AISHWARYANAGULA Counsel for the Respondent/coniplainant(S): 1.PAPUDIPPU SASHIDAR REDDY 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following order: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners herein/A1, A4 & A8 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.252 of 2020 on the file of learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Proddatur for the offences punishable under Section 324 read with 34 I PC. 2 2. Heard Smt.Aishwarya Nagula, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Papudippu Sashidar Reddy, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent No.2 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State. 3. Smt. Aishwarya Nagula, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that a reading of the F.I.R and statements recorded by the Police, during investigation did not make out any prima facie case to proceed further against the petitioners herein by the learned Magistrate and therefore, they filed the present Petition to quash the case against them. Sri Papudippu Sashidar Reddy, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent No.2 would submit a perusal of statement of complainant, victims and wound certificate would prima facie disclose that the petitioners herein were present at the time of offence and participated in the offence and caused injuries to the complainant & other persons which are questions to be trialed by the learned Magistrate and it is not a fit case to quash. 4. 5. In the light of the above rival contentions, this Court considered the material on record which includes charge sheet, copy of F.I.R, statements of complainant & other witnesses and Wound Certificate which would show prima facie material to proceed further in this case. 3 Pleas raised by learned counsel for the petitioners before this Court are all factual questions which cannot be answered in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C and requires detailed examination by the trial Court, to find out the truth or otherwise. 6. In those facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case to quash and therefore, the present Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. However, since the case is of the year 2013 i.e., 12 years old case, learned Magistrate is directed to expedite the trial and dispose of the case, as expeditiously as possible, not later than six (06) months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Proddutur, YSR Kadapa District 2. The Station House Officer, Proddatur II Town PS, YSR Kadapa District 3. One CC to Smt. Aishwarya Nagula, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri Papudippu Sasidhar Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi [OUT] 6. Three CD Copies Stu sree HIGH COURT DATED:12/02/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.4306 of 2024 EP iS 0 “i MAR 2025 . Current Sictliin . 5 i.OesPATC.5:^ DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION