APHC010008742023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 181/2023 Between: 1. BYRAPUNENI SEKHAR, S/O KOTAIAH AGED 51 YEARS, R/O KAMMAPALEM OF ONGOLE TOWN. 2. GUDIPUDI SRIDHAR BABU,, S/O VEERAIAH AGED 54 YEARS, R/O KAMMAPALEM OF ONGOLE TOWN. 3. KATRAGADDA KISHOR KUMAR,, S/O SUBBA RAO AGED 35 YEARS, R/O KAMMAPALEM OF ONGOLE TOWN. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by the Public Prosecutor High Court of A.P., Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. VENKATESWARLU SANISETTY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731 is filed by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3, seeking quashment of proceedings against them in C.C.No.1353 of 2022 on the file of the Court of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ongole for the offences under Sections 447, 427 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 18602. 1 for short ‘Cr.P.C’ 2 for short ‘IPC’ 2 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Government sanctioned Ac.4.20 cents of dotted land in Sy.No.465/2 of Motumala Village, Kothapatnam Mandal, for construction of a Z.P. High School building, and the said land was duly handed over to the PRI authorities. An Education Committee was constituted to supervise the construction work. While the work was in progress, the Accused, claiming ownership over the land, obstructed the construction. It is further alleged that, on 23-03-2022 at about 8:00 AM, the Accused, along with others, threatened the proclainer operator engaged for the work and poured sand into the diesel tank of the proclainer, thereby causing damage and stopping the construction work. As such, the present case has been registered against the Petitioners / Accused alleging criminal trespass, mischief and criminal intimidation. 2. Heard Sri Venkateswarlu Sanisetty, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for Respondent/State. 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the allegations leveled against the Petitioners are false and omnibus. Learned counsel would further submit that, Accused Nos.1 and 2 had filed W.P.No.6802 of 2022 before this Court, challenging the action of the official Respondents herein in interfering with their possession over the subject property and this Court was pleased to pass interim orders dated 16.03.2022 and 23.03.2022 protecting the possession of the Petitioners over the subject property. Learned counsel would further submit that, inspite of the said orders, the De facto complainant 3 tried to barge in the property of the Petitioners which is a clear case of contempt. It is further submitted that Accused Nos.1 and 2 also filed Contempt Case No.2607 of 2022 on the file of this Court and the same is pending adjudication. Learned counsel would submit that, in view of the subsistence of a status quo order passed by this Court protecting the possession of the Petitioners over the subject property, the action of the De facto complainant in lodging the present criminal case against the Petitioners alleging criminal trespass and mischief with regard to the said property, would amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, prayed to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners. 4. Contrasting the same, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that there are specific allegations against the Petitioners. The truth or otherwise of the said allegations will be revealed during trial. Therefore, the proceedings against the Petitioners, at this stage, cannot be quashed. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition. 5. It is well settled that the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised sparingly, with circumspection, and only to prevent abuse of process of law or to secure the ends of justice. At the stage of considering a petition for quashment, this Court is not expected to conduct a roving enquiry into the disputed facts or to appreciate the evidence as if it were conducting a trial. 6. In the present case, the record discloses that Accused Nos.1 and 2 had approached this Court by filing W.P.No.6802 of 2022 complaining of 4 interference with their possession over the subject property. This Court, by interim orders dated 16.03.2022 and 23.03.2022, granted protection of possession in their favour. It is not in dispute that the said interim orders were in force on the date of the alleged incident, namely, 23.03.2022. In view of the subsistence of the interim orders protecting possession of the Petitioners, the alleged criminal trespass under Section 447 IPC does not arise. With regard to the allegations of mischief and criminal intimidation, the charge sheet does not disclose any material to prima facie establish the commission of the offences under Sections 427 and 506 IPC. The allegations are general in nature and do not show the essential ingredients required to constitute the said offences. The facts of the case indicate that the criminal proceedings were initiated in the backdrop of an existing dispute concerning possession of the subject land, which was already under consideration before this Court. The pendency of contempt proceedings arising out of the same dispute further reflects that the matter is substantially intertwined with the enforcement of interim orders passed by this Court. 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of the proceedings in C.C.No.1353 of 2022 against the Petitioners would amount to abuse of the process of Court, warranting exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.1353 of 2022 on the file of the Court of the Additional Judicial First 5 Class Magistrate, Ongole, against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3, are hereby quashed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 04.12.2025 Dinesh 6 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.181 of 2023 Dt.04.12.2025 Dinesh