IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI f •' v^- THURSDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6890 OF 2022 Between: 1. G.Vanaja, \N/o Late G.Sathyanarayana, Aged about 46 Years, Occ. House Wife, R/o. Door No. 10.27, Bbarathi Nagar, Chandragiri, Chittoor District, A.P. 2. G. Balaji, S/o Late G. Sathyanarayana, Aged about 31 Years, Occ. Business, R/o. Door No. 10.27, Bbarathi Nagar, Chandragiri,Chittoor District, A.P. 3. G. Anitha, W/o G. Balaji, Aged about 29 Years, Occ. House Wife, R/o. Door No. 10.27, Bharathi Nagar, Chandragiri, Chittoor District,A.P. 4. Gandlapalli Sarika,, W/o G.Sunil, Aged about 30 Years, Occ. House wife, R/o. Boyanapalli Village, Samireddipalli, Pakala Mandal, Chittoor District, A.P. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 1, 3, 4 & 5 AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by Inspector of Police P.S, Chandragiri Police Station, Chittoor District Rep by Public Prosecutor ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 2. C. Jamuna, W/o Gopi, Aged about 37 years, Occ. House wife, R/o.Door No. 22-123, Pathanapeta, Chandragiri Town^ Chittoor District, Andhra Pradesh. >4 ...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 call for the records relating to and in connection with Charge sheet filed in C. C. No 2 of 2016 on file of Hon'ble Chief Judicial Magistrate Cum Principal Asst. Sessions judge, Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh and Consequently quash petitioners/Accused No. 1, 3, 4 and 5 8 same against the 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 pleased to order stay of all further proceedings inconnection with Charge sheet filed in CC No.2 of 2016 file ofHon'ble Chief Judicial Magistrate Cum Principal Asst. Sessions judge, Chittoor, AndhraPradesh pending the disposal of the main Criminal Petition. on I.A. NO: 1 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 extend the Interim orders granted in CRLP No. 6890 of 2022 on 09-11-2022 till disposal of 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 V NITESH, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (AP) on Wr behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following ORDER : 1 APHC010457072022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ^-..*4 \ /I /-s [3396] AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6890/2022 Between: ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) G.vanaja and Others AND ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT{S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitloner/accused(S): 1.VN1TESH Counsel for the Respondent/complainant{S); 1 .PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6890/2022 ORDER; The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal 1973 (in short, “Cr.P.C.”) has been filed by the Procedure, Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1,3,4 & Sseeking quashment of the proceedings against them in C.C.No.02 of 2016 on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate cum Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Chittoor, Andhra Pradesh. Heard Sri V.Nitesh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. Notice sent to the respondent No.2, returned as refused. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners herein are A1 ,A3,A4 and A5.Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the allegations made against these petitioners are false. That apart, the allegations made by the respondent No.2 do not attract any provision of law under l.P.C or alleged provisions of law under Sections 403, 406, 420 of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme 3. (banning)Act, 1978. The allegations made against the petitioners are vague allegations does not attribute any overt-acts against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that the provisions of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (banning) Act, 1978 is a special enactment and police has no right to take cognizance of the 4. 3 said offence. Learned counsel would further submit that there are no allegations whatsoever to the effect that the petitioners herein induced the complainant and such inducement since from the inception is not present in this matter. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that there are 5. specific allegations against the petitioners that they were running an unauthorised chit fund scheme and had cheated the chit subscribers by not paying money due to them. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would further submit that there are no allegations to attract the Sections 3 and 4 of thePrize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (banning) Act, 1978. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor finally submits that the Court may pass appropriate Orders. 6. Considering the submissions made and on a keen perusal of the chargesheet would show that as Sections 4 and 5 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (banning)Act, 1978 were not applicable to the facts of the case, they were deleted. As can be seen from the proceeding sheet dated 09.11.2022, a Coordinate Bench of this Court has observed that the provisions of Section 3 r/w 4 of the said Act were included on the ground that the Magistrate had returned the charge sheet with an objection that the said provisions would be applicable. In that view, prima facie, the provisions of the said Act including Sections 3 and 4 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (banning) Act, 1978 would not be applicable. 4 In that view, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed,regarding the Sections 3 and'^ 'Ot the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (banning) Act, 1978. However, the Trial in relation to the other offences may go on. The learned Trial Judge is requested to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible without granting any adjournment in a casual way by mere asking. - 7. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- K.J.RAJABABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// N OFFICER S To 1. The Chief Judicial Magistrate Cum,Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Chittor. 2. The Inspector of Police, Chankragiri Police Station, Chittoor District. 3. OneCCto SRI. V NITESH, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies Sm TAC HIGH COURT f V DATED:20/02/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.6890 of 2022 ^ ^2 JUN 2025 PARTLY ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION