APHC010469282025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9568 OF 2025 Between: 1. Syed Noor, S/O Rasool Aged about 45 years, R/0 D. NO. 1 Power Office Back side, Mohammad Nagar, Markapur Town and Mandal, Prakasam District. 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by their public prosecutor, AP High Court at Amaravathi. 2. The Sub Inspector of Police, The SHO, Markapur Town Police Station Prakasam District. 3. Bommireddy Radhika, W/0 late Nagarjunareddy aged about 44 years, R/0. Gorlagadda Street, Markapur Town, Markapur, Praksam District. Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court Crime No. 19 of 2025 dated 07 PS and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9568 OF 2025 1. Syed Noor, S/O Rasool Aged about 45 years, R/0 D. NO. 1-203 Power Office Back side, Mohammad Nagar, Markapur Town and Mandal, ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by their public prosecutor, AP High 2. The Sub Inspector of Police, The SHO, Markapur Town Police Station 3. Bommireddy Radhika, W/0 late Nagarjunareddy aged about 44 years, R/0. Gorlagadda Street, Markapur Town, Markapur, Praksam District. ...Respondents on under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to to pass an order quashing the Crime No. 19 of 2025 dated 07-02-2025 U/S 318(4) BNS of Markapur Town IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA 203-E-96-A, Power Office Back side, Mohammad Nagar, Markapur Town and Mandal, ...Petitioner 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by their public prosecutor, AP High 2. The Sub Inspector of Police, The SHO, Markapur Town Police Station 3. Bommireddy Radhika, W/0 late Nagarjunareddy aged about 44 years, R/0. ...Respondents on under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of pleased to to pass an order quashing the (4) BNS of Markapur Town Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased pleased to pass an interim order staying all further proceedings in the Crime No. 19 of 2025 dated 07-02-2025 U/S 318(4) BNS of Markapur Town PS pending disposal of the main petition Criminal Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: KISHORE VANGARA Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following order: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9568 OF 2025 ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731 has been filed, by the Petitioner/Accused, seeking to quashing the Crime No. 19 of 2025 dated 07-02-2025 U/S 318(4) BNS of Markapur Town PS. 02. Heard Sri Kishore Vangara, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Ms. Lakshmi Prasanna, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State. 03. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the sole accused in the above crime. It is alleged that the petitioner had promised Respondent No. 2 to secure a job for the latter’s son and in that connection, collected an amount of ₹9,48,000/- from Respondent No. 2. However, as the petitioner failed to secure any employment or refund the said amount, the present case came to be registered for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of the BNS. Learned counsel contended that the allegations are false, purely civil in nature, and that the criminal proceedings are an abuse of process of law. 04. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is at a nascent stage, and the allegations made in the complaint, if proved, disclose the ingredients of the alleged offence. It is therefore submitted that the police may be permitted to proceed with the investigation in accordance with law. 05. Having considered the submissions made on both sides and upon perusal of the material placed before this Court, it appears that the allegations in the complaint, prima facie, disclose the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 318(4) of the BNS. As rightly contended by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, the investigation is still at a preliminary stage, and it would be premature for this Court to adjudicate upon the disputed questions of fact at this juncture. 06. This Court is, therefore, of the opinion that no case is made out for interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. at this stage. Further as the offence registered against the petitioners is punishable with less than seven years period of imprisonment, Investigating Officer is at liberty to complete the investigation, in accordance with law. In the event of any coercive action sought to be taken against the petitioners, concerned police authorities are directed to scrupulously follow the procedure prescribed under Section 35 (3) of BNSS, [41-A Cr.P.C.] and the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar1. However, it is made clear that if any incriminating material is collected during the course of investigation and if a charge sheet is filed, the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail the remedies available to him in accordance with law. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall stands closed. ________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 15.09.2025 KKV 1 (2014) 8 SCC 273 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9568 OF 2025 Date: 15.09.2025 KKV