IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.7840 of 2024 Between: 1. Merugu Nagarjuna, S/o. Merugu Koteswara Rao, Aged about 60 Occ. Ex-Minister, R/o. 7-51 Malapalli, Vellaturu, Guntur District. 2. V. Muralimohan Reddy, S/o. Narsireddy, Aged about 41 years, R/o. 2 14/a, Satyalapadu, Krishna District. years. ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 & 2 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through S.H.O. Tadepalli, P.S., Guntur District, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. 2. Baluguri Sri Venkata Padmavathi @ Baluguri Padmavathi, W/o. Venkateswara Rao, aged about 54 years, R/o. 30-31-10, Chuttugunta Cement Road, Vijayawada (Urban), Buckinghampet, Krishna District. ...RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 528 of BNSS (under Section 482 of 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 pertaining to Crime No. 495 of 2024 of Tadepalli Police Station District and quash the same. Cr.P.C) , Guntur f I.A. NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS (under Section 482 of Cr.P.C) 1^y?ng that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of 4: Crfminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings including arrest of the petitioners in connection with Crime No.495 of 2024 of Tadepalli Police Station, Guntur District, pending disposal of the main criminal petition. '4 * • This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri S Dushyanth Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri T Nagarjuna Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following ORDER : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No. 7840 OF 2024 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in crime No.495 of 2024 of Tadepalli police station, Guntur district. Petitioners herein are arrayed as A. 1 and A.2 in the said crime, which is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 420, 506 read with 34 IPC. Basing on a report lodged by 2^^ respondent/ defacto complainant, the subject crime has been registered. The allegations, in brief, in the report lodged by 2nd respondent are that she got acquaintance with A. 1 for the last five years of lodging the report. A. 1 took Rs.90.00 lakhs from her in the year 2020 under the guise of providing contract works in his constituency. 2. but he failed to do so. On 23.03.2020 at about 4.00 PM, he forcibly enjoyed her. Thereafter also, he enjoyed her forcibly thrice. A. 2, who was working as Personal Assistant of A. 1, took her to Ramasneha Apartment, m 2 adjacent to D-Mart, Kunchenapalli, kept her i and locked from outside. in a room Though she demanded to repay the amount paid by her, A. 1 did not do so. A.2 also threatened her that the her. amount would not be repaid to She waited for many days, and as no justice was done to her and in view of piling up of debts and i in EMIs payable to the Bank, she lodged the report. increase present 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for 1st respondent-state and the learned respondent/defacto complainant. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the alleged incident is said to have taken place 23.03.2020 and the present report was lodged to police on 01.11.2024 i.e. after lapse of four years and seven months, and there is absolutely no explanation as to why there is so much of delay in lodging the report. 5. During the course of investigation, police got the statement of the defacto complainant recorded under appearing counsel for 2"^ on 3 Section 164 CrPC, by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Railways, Guntur. In the said statement, the defacto complainant stated that the present police report has not been filed by her, but some of the persons, who are associated with the petitioner No.l herein, made her to sign on a white paper on the pretext that they would provide job to her son, who studied B.Tech. (Civil), and thereafter, they gave the report to police as though she gave a report against the petitioners herein. In the said statement, she categorically stated that the present complaint has been fabricated and the same was brought into existence without her knowledge. This Court perused the statement of the defacto complainant recorded under Section 164 CrPC. Learned counsel for 2^^ respondent/defacto complainant too concurred with the version given by 2nd respondent/ defacto complainant. < 4 % 6. In Koneti Adimoolam V. State of A.P.f this Court held thus: The inherent powers of the Court are to serve the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the of any Court. Irrespective of the penal mentioned in the F.I.R. if the facts indicate that the proceedings knowledge of the victim, the abuse of process of Court. process provision initiated without same amounts to In the case on hand, the very victim-cum-defacto complainant submits that what are there in the F.I.R. were in are not true and no sexual advances or criminal intimidation were exerted on her by the petitioner/accused, such In circumstances. allowing any further proceedings in pursuance of such false F.I.R. would be abuse of process of Court. After noticing the principles laid down in Narinder Singh V. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Sirajul V. State of U.P. (2016) 9 SCC 201 and considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that there is merit in this petition. Point is answered in favour of the petitioner.” In view of the statement given by 2^^^ respondent/ defacto complainant that she is not interested i._ pursuing the matter further, this Court feels that in 2024 SCC OnLine AP 4237 5 continuation of the impugned proceedings i abuse of process of Court. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Proceedings in crime No.495 of 2024 of Tadepalli police Station, Guntur district are quashed. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in the Criminal Petition shall stand closed. nothing but IS 7. SD/- M.PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To 1. The Station House Officer, Tadepalli Police Station 2. Two CCS to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Amaravathi [OUT] 3. One CC to Sri S Dushyanth Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri T Nagarjuna Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Three CD Copies Guntur District. Pradesh, TK TAC HIGH COURT DATED:21/01/2025 # ORDER CRLP.No.7840 of 2024 2 h FEB 2025 . Current Section 1 .p:o uo ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION