IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7101 OF 2022. 7288 OF 2022. 3164 OF 2023 & 3150 OF 2023 CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7101 OF 2022 Between: M.R. SRINIVASAN, S/o. M.V Ranjachari, Hindu, age 60 years, residing at B-17, Mahaveer Residency, Trichy, Tamilnadu State. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED{S) AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Special Public Prosecutor, OBI, High Court Buildings, Amaravati ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in CC.09/2022 on the file of Special Judge for CBI Cases at Kurnool as against the petitioner. [CC.No.31 of 2020 on the file of III Additional special Judge for CBI Cases, Visakhapatnam is amended as CC.No.9 of 2022 on the file of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnool as per Court Order dated 05.05.2023 in lA No.01/2023 in CRLP No.7101/2022.] I.A. NO: 2 OF 2022 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioners in CC.09/2022 on the file of Special Judge for CBI Cases at Kurnool, pending the Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Raja Reddy Koneti, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, Special Public Prosecutor, CBI, High Court of Andhra Pradesh representing the Respondent. CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7288 OF 2022 Between: Aswa Satyanarayana, S/o. Late Savaranna, Aged about 55 worked as Chief Office Superintendent, O/o. Divisional Railway Manager, South Central Railway (P), Nanded, R/o. H.No.87-1096-3-4, IV Class Employee's Colony, Kurnool. years. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) 'AND State of AP, represented Special Public Prosecutor, CBI, High Court Buildings, Amaravati ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the p^^^^ in CC. 10/2022 on the file of Hon'ble Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnool as against the petitioner. [Prayer is amended as CC.No.10/2022 on the file of Hon'ble Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnool in place of II Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Vlsakhapatnam in CC.No.32 of 2020, as per the Court order dated 05.05.2023 in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in Crl.P.No.7288 of 2022] LA. NO: 2 OF 2022 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioners in CC. 10/2022 on the file of Hon'ble Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnool, pending Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Raja Reddy Koneti, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, Special Public Prosecutor, CBI, High Court of Andhra Pradesh representing the Respondent. CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3164 OF 2023 Between: Md. Zulfiqar Ahmad Sheriff, S/b. Md. Omar Sheriff, Muslim, aged about 56 years, Divisional Engineer (Bridges), South Central Railway, Guntakal, R/o. 8-6-2, Punja Center, Winchpet, Vijayawada. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Special Public Prosecutor, C.B.I., High Court Buildings, Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of ijfbunds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 6 of 2022 on the file of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnbol. LA. NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioner in C.C.No. 6 of 2022 ori the file of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnool, pending the Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Raja Reddy Koneti, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, Special Public Prosecutor, CBI, High Court of Andhra Pradesh representing the Respondent. CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3150 OF 2023 Between: 1. C.Jeelani Basha, S/o. C.Md. Haneef, Aged about 55 years. Chief Loco Inspector (open Line), Guntakal Division, South Central Railway, Guntakal, Anantapur District. 2. Pathan Buden Khan, S/d5 Late P.Mohd Khan, Age 46 Occ: Business, H.No.5/79, Porter Lane, Guntakal, Anantapur District. 3. Pathan Imran Khan, S/o. Pathan Buden Khan, Age 23 years. Student H.No.5/79, Porter Lane, Guntakal, Anantapur District. years. 4. Mohd. Arshad AN Khan, S/o. M.Khaja Khan, Aged about 29 years, R/o. RIy Qtr.No. 410/D H.No.5/317, Shanthinagar, Railway Colony Guntakal, Anantapur District. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Special Public Prosecutor, C.B.I., High Court Buildings, Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 20 of 2022 on the file of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnool. i.A. NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioner in C.C.No. 20 OF 2022 on the file of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnool, pending the Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Raja Reddy Koneti, Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, Special Public Prosecutor, CBI, High Court of Andhra Pradesh representing the Respondent. The Court made the following coinhmon order: APHC010475092022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos: 7101. 7288/2022 & 3164, 3150/2023 Criminal Petition No.7101 of 2022: Between; 1.M.R. SRINIVASAN, S/0. M.V RANJACHARI, RESIDING AT B-17. STATE. HINDU, AGE 60 YEARS, MAHAVEER RESIDENCEY, TRICHY, TAMILNADU ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, CBI,HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Criminal Petition No.7288 of 2022; Between: ASWA SATYANARAYANA, S/0. LATE SAVARANNA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, WORKED AS CHIEF OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT, 0/0. DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY(P), NANDED H,N0.87-1096-3-4, iV CLASS EMPLOYEE'S COLONY, KURNOOL. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED R/0. AND STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI. CBI, ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Criminal Petition No.3l04 of 2023: Between: 1.MD. ZULFIQAR AHMAD SHERIFF,, S/0. MD. OMAR SHERIFF, MUSLIM, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, DIVISIONAL ENGINEER (BRIDGES), SOUTH CEN TRAL RAILWAY, GUNTAKAL, R/0. 8-6-2, PUNJA CENTER, . WINCHPET, VIJAYAWADA. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, CiB.L, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Criminal Petition No.3150 of 2023: Between: 1.C.JEELANI BASHA, S/0. C.MD. HANEEF, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, CHIEF LOCO INSPECTOR (OPEN LINE), GUNTAKAL DIVISION, SOUTH 2 CENTRAL RAILWAY, GUNTAKAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 2.PATHAN BUDEN KHAN, S/0. LATE P.MOHD KHAN, AGE 46 YEARS OCC BUSINESS, H.NO.5/79, PORTER LANE, DISTRICT. 3.PATHAN IMRAN KH, AN, S/0. PATHAN BUDEN KHAN, AGE 23 YEARS, STUDENT, H.NO.5/79, PORTER LANE, GUNTAKAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 4.MOHD. ARSHAD ALI KHAN,, S/0. M.KHAJA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/0. RLY QTR.NO. 410/D, H.NO.5/317, SHANTHINAGAR RAILWAY GOLONY, GUNTAKAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. GUNTAKAL, ANANTAPUR ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, C.B.I., HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI. I ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.P S P SURESH KUMAR, Spl. Public Prosecutor for CBI The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: Criminal Petition No.7101 of 2022 under Section 482 of Cocje of Criminal Procedure, 1973^ has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.9 of 2022 on the file of the Court of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnool registered for the offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, i 1988^ I Criminal Petition No.7288 of 2022 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.10 of 2022 on the file of the Court of Special Judge for CBI 1 for short ‘Cr.P.C’ - For short‘PC Act’ 3 Cases, Kurnool registered for the offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d)of PC Act. Criminal Petition No.3164 of 2023 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C has been: filed by the Petitioner/Accused seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.6 of 2022 on the file of the Court of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnool registered for the offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of PC Act. Criminal Petition No.3150 of 2023 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C has beeh filed by the Petitioners/Accused seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.20 of 2022 on the file of the Court of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnool registered for the offences under Section 384 read with 104 of 1PC and Section 3(2) read with 13(1)(d) of PC Act. 2. Heard Sri Raja Reddy Koneti, learned counsel for the Petitioners and Sri i P.S.P.Suresh Kumar, learned Special Public Prosecutor for Respondent/C.B.l. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that, initially the case was registered by the Inspector of Police, CBI, Hyderabad and charge sheet was filed on the file of the Court of Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases Hyddrabad and subsequently in the year 2020, the case was transferred to II Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Visakhapatnam and from there to the Court of Special Judge for CBI, Kurnool. Learned counsel would further submit that, in view of the bifurcation of Telangana State, the CBI, Hyderabad branch has lost its jurisdiction over the Rayalaseema Districts. It is submitted 4 that Central Government has not issued any order or circular as required under Sections 3, 4, and 5 of Delhi Special Police Establishment Act extending the powers and jurisdiction of CBI, Visakhapatnam of CBI, Hyderabad to conduct investigation over Rayalaseem Districts. Therefore, the very registration of the present crimes against the respective Petitioners, is without jurisdiction. Learned counsel would submit that, after the notified date, the Special Judge at Hyderabad had no jurisdiction to ciccept the charge ^heet and the material filed, in view of the Re-Organization of State of Andhra As suchi the Pradesh into State of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, proceedings against the Petitioners in the present cases, are liable to be quashed. Per contra, learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI would submit that the jurisdiction of CBI Court at Kurnool was rightly conferred by the Hon’ble I High Court of A.P and the Government. Learned Special Public Proseputor would further submit that, by virtue of bifurcation of State of Andhra Pradesh in the year 2014 through the A.P Re-organization Act, 2014, all Laws and Rules : j which were in existence as on the appointed date, shall continue till they are modified or repealed within a period of two years from 02.06.2014. submitted that, the jurisdiction of CBI will not assert or alter due to bifurcation of State since CBI is not having any territorial limitation. Further, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in CBI vs A. Satish Kurpar & 4. It is 5 Others^, which was carried by the GBI, questioning the view taken by the Hon’ble Division Bench of High Court of A.P., on the very same issue, was settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in favour of CBI. In view of clear finding of the Supreme Court, on the very same subject matter, the CBI Court, Kurnbol has got jurisdiction to try the present cases. Therefore, there grouhds to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners and quash petitions are liable to be dismissed. are no 5. I Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel representing both I ■ ‘ the parties, now the point that would emerge for determination is; Whether there are any justifiable grounds for quashment of the. I proceedings agdinst the Petitioners/Accused in C.C.Nos.9, 10, 6 and 20 of 2022 respectively on the file of the Court of Special Judge for CBI, Kurnool? Determination by the Court A bare perusal of Section 482 makes it clear that the Code 6. envisages that inherent powers of the High Court are not limited or affected so as to make orders as may be necessary: (i) to give effect to any order under the Code or, (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or, otherwise (iii) to secure ends of Justice. A court while sitting in Section 482 jurisdiction is not functioning as a court of appeal or a court of revision. It must exercise its powers to do real and substantial justice, depending on the facts and j circumstances of the case. These powers must be invoked for compelling ^ 2025: INSC 11 6 - mi reasons of abuse of process of law or glaring injustice, which are against sound principles of criminal jurisprudence. 7. Initially the present cases have been registered against the Petitioners by the Inspector of Police, CBI, Hyderabad and after completion of investigation, respective charge sheets have been filed before the Court of Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad for the alleged offences. Subsequently, in view of the bifurcation of the State of Andhra Pradesh, in view of the Andhra Pradesh Re-Organization Act, 2014, which, came into force from 02.06.2014, the said cases were transferred to the Court of II Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Visakhapatnam and from there to the Court of Special Judge for CBI, Kurnool. As seen from the material placed on record, in the similar 8. circumstances, the Petitioners in W.P.Nos.26990 of 2021 and 5441 of 2022 filed the same petitions before this Court to declare the action of conducting trial in C.C.Nos. 35 & 37 of 2020 pending on the file of the Court of II Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases Visakhapatnam as illegal and to quash the proceedings. The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court allowed the said petitions by way of a Common Order, dated 13.04.2023. Aggrieved thereby, the Central Bureau of Investigation carried the matter to the Hon’ble Apec Court, wherein, the Hon’ble Division Bench of the Apex Court’ vide Judgment dated 02.01.2025 held as follows: 7 “22. In the light of the discussion as above and construction of the Govt, orders it can only be held that the High Court had erred in holding that there was no notification issued conferring the status of Special Court in terms of Section 4 of the PC Act to the CBI Court, Hyderabad. Now, the transfer of the cases concerned subsequent to the CBI Policy Division order regarding the re-defining the territorial jurisdiction of CBI, Hyderabad and Vishakhapatnam branches dated 28.03.2019 and issuance of notification by the High Court of Telangana vide ROC No. 334/E-1/2008 dated 03.09.2019 and the transfer of CC Nos.35 of 2020 and 37 of 2020 to the Court of the Special Judge for CBI Cases, Kurnool were held as in accordance with law by the High Court. In such circumstances and in the light of the conclusion already arrived at, the terms of the provisions under circular memo dated 26.05.2014 all “laws” applicable to the undivided State of Andhra Pradesh on 01.06.2014 would continue to apply to the hew States, namely, the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh despite the bifurcation of the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh till such time they were altered, repealed or amended.” The Hoh’ble Apex Court further held that, even according to the High Court in the impugned judgment, G.O.Ms. dated 07.08.2012 issued by the State of Andhra Pradesh, CBI Court at Hyderabad was given the power to exercise jurisdiction over Rayalaseema Districts of Andhra Pradesh, namely Chittoor, Anantapurm, Kadapa and Kunool to try cases registered under the PAC Act and the said provision continued thereafter by subsequently issued Government Orders. The Hon’ble Apex Court further held that, the terms of the provisions under circular memo dated 26.05.2012 all “laws” applicable to the undivided State of Andhra Pradesh on 01.06 2014 would continue to appiy to the new States, namely, the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh despite the bifurcation of the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh till such time they were altered, repealed or amended. Accordingly, the Hon’ble Apex Court set aside the Common Order passed in W.P Nos;26990 of 2021 9. 8 and 5441 of 2022 and ordered to restore the cases to the file of the Court of SpecialJudge for CBI Cases, Kurnool. As seen from the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court, the same is squarely applicable to the present set of facts, discussion by the Hon’ble Apex Court on the same subject matter, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the present petitions, which are filed in the similar circumstances. There is no force in the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the Petitioners. The petitions lack merit and the same 10. In view of the elaborate are liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Criminal Petitions are dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. 11. Sd/- SHAIK MOHAMMED RAFI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Special Judge for CBI Cases at Kurnool, Kurnool District. 2. One CC to Sri Raja Reddy Koheti, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CC to Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, Special Public Prosecutor for CBI High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 4. Three CD Copies /> GPC RAM HIGH COURT DATED: 03/02/2025 COMMON ORDER CRLP.Nos.7101 OF 2022, 7288 OF 2022, 3164 OF 2023 & 3150 OF 2023 DISMISSING ALL THE CRLPs