V, IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI THURSDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3129 OF 2022 Between: 1. Ronanki Rukmini @ Saraswati, W/o. Appa Rao, Aged 65 years. R/o Parasamba Village, Palasa Mandal, Srikakulam District. 2. Ronanki Gopala Krishna, ;S/o. Appa Rao, Aged 35 years, Occ- Public Servant, R/o Parasamba Village, Palasa Mandal, Srikakulam District. ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED N0.2 & 3 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT 2. Ronanki Papayya, S/o. late Appanna, Aged about 76 years. Retired employee, R/o Parasamba village, Palasa Mandal, Srikakulam District. ...RESPONDENT/DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT 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 pleased to Crl.MP.No.185 of 2019 in C.C.No.l 18 of 2014, of the Judicial Magistrate of 1®* Class, Palasa, quash the Orders dt.10.01.2022 in / I.A. NO: 1 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 grant stay of all further proceedings i C.C.No.118 of 2014 in on the fil6 of the Judicial Magistrate of 1®* Class, Palasa, including the personal appearance of the petitioners pending disposal of the above CRLP This Petition coming on for bearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri G. SAI NARAYANA RAO, Advocate for the Petitioners Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri A. SHANKAR, Advocate for the ResiDondent No.2 The Court made the following ORDER: and the Public RAVI 1 APHC010164272022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3129/2022 Between: ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) Ronanki Rukmini @ Saraswati, and Others AND ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner/accused{S): 1.GSAI NARAYANARAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. A RAVI SHANKAR 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Courtmade the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3129/2022 ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, “Cr.P.C.”) has been filed by the Petitioners/ Accused Nos. 2 & 3, seeking quashment of the proceedings pending against them in Crl.M.P.No.185 of 2019 in C.C.No.118 of 2014 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Palasa. Heard Sri G.Sai Narayana Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Sri 2. A.Ravi Shankar, learned Counsel for the respondent No.2 and Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that Police after due investigation filed charge sheet deleting the names of the petitioners/A2 and A3 by ruling out their presence at the time of the alleged incident. Learned counsel would further submit that after five years of filing of charge sheet, protest petition has been filed by the respondent No.2. Learned counsel would further submit that only to trouble the petitioners, false allegations are made against them to rope them in Criminal proceedings. Learned Counsel finally prays for quashment of the case against the petitioners. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 vehemently 4. opposed the petition. Learned counsel would further submit that the defacto complainant could not receive notices either from the Police or from the Court \ 3 on filing the charge sheet in this case. After they entered the Court in C.C.No.118 of 2014, they filed protest petition. Hence, delay occurred in filing the protest petition. Learned counsel would further submit that from the beginning even in the information given to the Police, which is registered as crime against A1 to A3. The names of the A2 and A3 are mentioned. Learned counsel would further submit that it is not a fit case for quashment and finally prays for dismissal of the petition. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that without causing any prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioners, the petition may be disposed of by dispensing the presence of the petitioners before the trial Court. 5. 6. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material place on record, after filing the charge sheet by the Police, it appears notice has not been issued to the defacto complainant. As can be seen from the cognizance order, office note would not show the presence of other accused in the case. That made the learned Trial Judge not to issue any notice to the defacto complainant for deletion of A2 and A3 in the case. Be that as it may, there is a delay in filing the protest petition. The proceeding sheet would show that there were efforts made for compromise in the case which was not arrived at and then the protest petition has been filed. Under these circumstances, it is apposite to dispose of the present petition without causing any prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioners. However, the presence of the petitioners before the Trial Court is dispensed with unless their presence is 4 specifically directed by the Trial Court. The petitioners are at liberty to raise all their contentions before the Trial Court in their defence. Learned Trial Judge is requested to appreciate the same and take appropriate decision according to law. Learned Trial Judge is further requested to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible without granting any adjournments in a casual way by mere asking and report the progress to the Registrar (Judicial). In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. 7. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- P. VINOD KUMAR ASSISTANT REGI^AR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. Judicial Magistrate of 1®* Class, Palasa 2. One CC to SRI G. SAI NARAYANA RAO, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRI A. RAVI SHANKAR, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies Cnr SM HIGH COURT DATED:13/02/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.3129 of 2022 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION