1 Dr.VJPJ, Crl.P.No. 10530 of 2022 APHC010714902022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10530/2022 Between: Konadam Rama Rao ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. BONU RAMA SHANKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2. K B RAMANNA DORA The Court made the following: 2 Dr.VJPJ, Crl.P.No. 10530 of 2022 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10530/2022 ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, “Cr.P.C.”) has been filed by the Petitioner/ Accused, seeking quashment of the proceedings pending against him in FIR No.172 of 2020 of Parvathipuram P.S., ParvathipuramManyam District registered for the offence under Sections 409, 468, 471, 419 & 420 of IPC. 2. Heard Sri B. Rama Shankara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri K.B.Ramanna Dora, learned Standing counsel for the respondent No.2 and Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has nothing to do with the offence. The customer who made the complaint against the petitioner has withdrawn his complaint and continuing criminal proceedings against the petitioner is mere abuse of process of law. 4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.2 vehemently opposed the petition. Learned Standing counsel would submit that it is not a fit case for quashment. The contentions raised are a matter of defence. Learned Standing counsel finally prays for dismissal of the petition. 3 Dr.VJPJ, Crl.P.No. 10530 of 2022 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that it is not a fit case for quashment. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor finally prays for dismissal of the petition. 6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material placed on record, there are clear allegations made against the petitioner/accused to attract the offences under Sections 409, 468, 471, 419 & 420 of IPC. As rightly put by the learned Standing counsel for the respondent No.2, this Court cannot conduct a mini Trial to decide the truth or otherwise except evaluate the material placed before this Court. When there is a prima facie material to proceed further in this matter which requires investigation at the full length of Trial, it is not a fit case for quashment. In that view, the petition deserves dismissal. 7. In the result, the petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 30.01.2025 UPS 4 Dr.VJPJ, Crl.P.No. 10530 of 2022 154 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.10530 of 2022 Dt.30.01.2025 UPS 5 Dr.VJPJ, Crl.P.No. 10530 of 2022