APHC010620592023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9579/2023 Between: 1. TOKALA KONDALA RAO,, S/O.VENKATESWARLU, AGE 42 YEARS, LECTURER IN PRIVATE COLLEGE, R/O.PEDA MOPADU VILLAGE, KANDUKURU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT (PRESENT NELLORE DT.) 2. MUPPA PRASAD,, S/O. VENKATESWARLU, AGE 56 YEARS. AGRICULTURE, R/O.MOPADU VILLAGE, KANDUKURU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, (PRESENT NELLORE DT.) ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P., NELAPADU, AMARAVATHI. 2. MADALA SUSEELA, W/O.RAMAIAH, AGE 63 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O.PEDDA MOPADU VILLAGE, KANDUKURU (M), PRAKASAM DISTRICT (PRESENT NELLORE DT.) ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. P A SESHU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. RAM BABU DEVAVARAPU 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court Made the Following Order: The instant petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2, seeking quashment of proceedings against them in S.C.No.113 of 2023 on the file of the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Ongole. 2 2. Heard P.A.Seshu, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ram Babu Devavarapu, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1/State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, even according to the entire evidence and the statements of witnesses recorded by the police, the presence of A1 has not been established, as there are numerous discrepancies and contradictions in the statements of LW1 (mother of the deceased) and other witnesses. Moreover, the present case appears to be foisted upon the petitioners as part of a case and counter-case. The petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present crime. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that it is not a fit case for quashment. 5. The contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners touching the factual aspects of the matter, this Court cannot entertain the quash petition. 6. In that view, the Criminal Petition is disposed of, without causing any prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioners before the trial Court. However, the petitioners are at liberty to raise all these contentions before the trial Court and the learned Judge may appreciate them and take appropriate decision, in accordance with law. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date : 06.08.2025 Asr 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.9579 of 2023 Dt.06.08.2025 Asr