APHC010049382021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 812/2021 Between: SALADI MURALI KRISHNA, S/O SURYA NARAYANA, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, EX-PRESIDENT SSPACS, R/O KARUGORUMILLI VILLAGE, ACHANTA MANDAL, W.G.DIST. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI. 2. MUTYALA NAGESWARA RAO, S/O SEHA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, BUSINESS, R/O KARGORUMILLI VILLAGE, ACHANTA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. N A RAMACHANDRA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. MEDAPATI SANTOSH REDDY 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed, by the Petitioner/Accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.304 of 2020 on the file of the Court of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Palakollu, for the offences under Sections 324 and 506 read with 34 IPC. 2 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri N.A.Ramachandra Murthy, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner was not present at the scene of offence at the relevant time. Learned counsel would further submit that, even as per the contents of the complaint, this case cannot be registered against the Petitioner. 3. Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 4. As can be seen from the report submitted to the Police, as rightly put by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, the presence of the Petitioner was not there, however, some specific allegations are made against him to the effect that, at the instance of the Petitioner, Accused Nos.1 and 2, have committed the alleged offences under Sections 324 and 506 IPC. Such being the case, the role of the Petitioner sharing common intention cannot be decided without conducting trial. 5. In that view, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to raise all his contentions before the trial Court and the learned trial Judge may appreciate and take a decision according to law. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:28.07.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.812 of 2021 Dt.28.07.2025 Dinesh