APHC010453542025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [0] TUESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9002/2025 Between: 1. NANDA PHAUL, S/O. NANDA PHAUL, AGED 49 YEARS, OCCU BUSINESS, R/O. FLAT NO. 709, VERTEX SADGURU KRUPA, B BLOACK, NIZAMPET, QUTHBULLAPUR MANDAL, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT. 2. NADA RAJANI, W/O. NANDA PHAUL C/O. KODA APPA RAJU AGED 46 YEARS, OCCU HOUSE WIFE, R/O. VILLA NO. 7, VERTEX LAKEVIEW HOMES, OPP CRAYONS SCHOOL, NIZAMPET, MEDCHAL-MALKAJIGIR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P, THROUGH ITS PS KRISHNALANKA, NTR KRISHNA DISTRICT 2. INDUKURI GURRAJU ALIAS KRISHNA RAJU, S/O NARASIMHA RAJU, AGED 67 YRS, OCCU BUSINESS, R/O. MAHALAKSHMI RESIDENCY, SIRES RAJ ROAD, BRUNDAVANA COLONY, LABBIPETA, VIJAYAWADA, NTR KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): 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 2 IA NO: 2 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 Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. ALLURI RAGHU RAMA AURAVA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 3 The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023 (u/s.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) has been filed by the Petitioners/Accused, seeking quashment of the entire proceedings against them in FIR No.124 of 2025, Krishnalanka, NTR Krishna District. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. K.Priyanka Lakshmi learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petition may be disposed of by giving protection to the petitioners vide guidelines of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar1. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the offence registered against the petitioners is punishable with less than seven years period of imprisonment and necessary direction may be given to the concerned Station House Officer. 5. Considering the submissions, this criminal petition is disposed of with the following; a. Investigating Officer is at liberty to complete the investigation, in accordance with law. b. In the event of any coercive action sought to be taken against the petitioners, concerned police authorities are directed to scrupulously follow the procedure prescribed under Section 35 (3) of BNSS, [41-A 1 (2014) 8 SCC 273 4 Cr.P.C.] and the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar’s case (supra). 6. It goes without saying that, if any charge sheet is filed in the above crime, the petitioners are at liberty to challenge the charge sheet, if he feels aggrieved by the same. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall stands closed. ______________________________________ Dr.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA,J Date: 02.09.2025 MH 5 47 HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.9002 of 2025 Dt.02.09.2025 MH 6