APHC010337702025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] FRIDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7054/2025 Between: 1. M S GNANAMBIKA, W/O M.S. SUNDARAJAN HINDU, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/O DOOR NO. 5-61, SENGUNDHAR STREET PUTTUR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. SHAIK JANI BASHA, W/O WAHAB BASHA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, BUSINESS R/O DOOR NO. 1-4, GOLLAVANI KALVA THONDAVADA POST, CHANDRAGIRI MANDAL TIRUPATI DISTRICT 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtpleased to QUASH Order dated on 27.05.2025 in CrI.M.P. No.1145/2025 in C.C. No.118 of 2019, passed by the First Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati and consequently to allow the same for the purpose of sending Ex.P1 Cheque for the purpose of Expert Opinion, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased pleased to stay all further proceedings in C.C. 2 No.118 of 2019, on the file of the First Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati Pending disposal of the above petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. PAWAN KUMAR MALAPATI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2. 3 The Court made the following Order: The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.1145 of 2025 in C.C.No.118 of 2019. The petitioner had filed a petition seeking to send Ex.P1 for expert opinion. The learned Magistrate has dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner has not submitted the purpose for referring Ex.P1 for expert opinion. The petitioner has admittedly stated in the petition has stated that the petitioner has signed the cheque; however, is disputing the other writings on the cheque, such as the name of the holder in due course and the amounts. It is also submitted that an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was interpolated as Rs.7,00,000/-, and the signature on the cheque is not disputed. 2. Purpose of referring the cheque for expert opinion would not serve any purpose. That apart C.C. is of the year 2019. Ex.P1 was marked on 03.05.2022 and after a lapse of more than three years, the petition seeking to send Ex.P1 for expert opinion was filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter is now posted for defense evidence. 4. Considering the nature of the prayer sought for and also considering the stage of the case, this Court is not inclined to intervene and accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. 5. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date : 11.07.2025 BMS