APHC010753522014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3239] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13257/2014 Between: Muppe Chandra Sekhar Reddy ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. N ASHWANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2 APHC010447032014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3239] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13258/2014 Between: Chennuru Vankadara Suresh ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. N ASHWANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NOS: 13257 and 13258 of 2014 The Court made the following Common Order: As both Criminal Petitions arise out of the same Sessions Case i.e., SC No.153 of 2024 on the file of the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Kadapa (Old SC No.179 of 2014), they are being heard together and are being disposed of by way of this common order. 2. Petitioner in Crl.P.No.13257 of 2014 figured as A15 and Petitioner in Crl.P.No.13258 of 2014 figured as A16 in the above Sessions Case. Both A15 and A16 filed the present Criminal Petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings in the above Sessions Case. 3. Brief facts of the case is as follows:- i) A1 to A3, A9, A10, A12 and A15 to A17 are residents of Proddatur, A4 is the resident of Pulivendula, A5, A7 & A8 are residents of Tadipatri, A6 is resident of Bidinamcherla Village of Simhadripuram Mandal and A11 & A13 are residents of V.V.Reddy Nagar, Kalamalla, Yerraguntla Mandal. A1 to A11 are close associates and were involved in number of kidnap cases in Proddatur, Tadipatri and other places. A1 is the leader of the 4 Gang. A12, A13 and A15 to A17 are supporters of A1 Gang. A1 was originally an auto driver by profession. As the income earned by plying auto was not sufficient for his needs and with an intention to earn easy money, A1 indulged in smuggling of red sanders and then formed a gang with A1 to A11 and indulged themselves in kidnaps for ransom, murders etc. They were watching the movements of rich persons and kidnap them for ransom and demanding huge sums of money. ii) In that process, the accused watched the movements of LW1 (de-facto complainant) and wanted to kidnap for ransom, they hatched a plan and accordingly, on 14.06.2012 at about 08.30 PM, while LW1 was returning home from his Gas Agency in Proddatur Town, and when he reached near Rajarajeswari Temple on a two wheeler, A1 to A11 came in a Maruthi Omni Van bearing No.AP02 F 5999 and forcefully kidnapped him in the said van. The accused demanded an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- and threatened to kill him, if the money is not paid. LW1 instructed his clerk-LW3 to receive amount of Rs.13,00,000/- from LW4 and Rs.15,00,000/- from another person who is no more and asked him to arrange available cash of Rs.4,00,000/- in his gas agency totaling Rs.32,00,000/- and instructed him to pack that money 5 and get ready the packet to give it to the person instructed by him. Accordingly, one of the accused approached LW3 on 15.06.2012 and received the cash of Rs.32,00,000/- from LW3. After receiving the said amount, all the accused released LW1 asking him not to reveal the incident to anybody and thereafter, all the accused went to the houses of A12 and A13 and secreted that money with A13, on the instructions of A12. A1 paid an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to each accused. The Petitioners who are advocates concealed and screened the offences committed by A1 and his gang. On the basis of said allegations, the Police filed charge sheet against A1 to A17. 4. Sri N.Ashwini Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that both the petitioners are practicing advocates at Proddatur and they filed bail applications on behalf of some of the accused. Except that, there is no role attributed to the petitioners. The only allegation made against the petitioners herein/A15 & A16 who are advocates for A1 is that they concealed and screened the offence committed by A1 and his gang. Even if the said allegation is accepted, in its entirety, it cannot by in any stretch of imagination be said that the petitioners are guilty of the offences alleged in the charge sheet. There is no allegation that 6 the petitioners are also formed into unlawful assembly and committed the offences. There is no allegation that the petitioners were having common object attracting offence under Section 149 IPC. Further, there is no allegation made by the prosecution attracting offence under 109 IPC. Absolutely, there is no allegation against the petitioners in the charge sheet attracting offences under Section 147, 148, 109 and 149 IPC. Admittedly, even according to the prosecution, the gang consists of A1 to A11. So far as the allegation made against A12 & A13, is concerned that they secreted the money. It is also alleged against A17 that he also received money from A1. As already pointed out, the only allegation made against the petitioners who are practicing advocates is that they concealed and screened the offences committed by A1. As such, learned counsel for the petitioners requests this Court, to quash the proceedings, as it is nothing but an abuse of process of law. 5. On the other hand, Sri A.Sai Rohith, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the petitions. 6. This Court perused the entire material available on record. According to the prosecution, A1 to A11 formed a gang and they were indulged in cases of kidnap and murder in the areas of 7 Proddatur, Tadipatri and other places. According to the prosecution, A1 to A11 hatched a plan and as per their plan, they kidnapped LW1 on 14.06.2012 at about 08.30 PM and demanded a ransom of Rs.50,00,000/-. It is also alleged that on 15.06.2012, A1 to A11 received an amount of Rs.32,00,000/- from LW3 and thereafter, let off the victim-LW1. It is also alleged in the charge sheet that A1 to A11 secreted the money in the house of A13, as per the instructions of A12. As such, the petitioners never participated in the so called kidnap. The only allegation made against the petitioners is that A15 & A16, who are advocates of A1, concealed and screened the offence committed by A1 and his gang. As already pointed out, petitioners appeared for some of the accused in various criminal cases. Except that, there is no relationship between the gang of A1 and petitioners. Being the counsels, they appeared for the accused in different cases. As such, it cannot by any stretch of imagination, be said that the petitioners are guilty of the offences under Section 147, 148, 506, 109 and 149 IPC. Absolutely, there is no allegation made against the petitioners attracting the above offences. As such, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of law. 8 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the impugned proceedings initiated against the petitioners are liable to be quashed. 8. In the result, both the Criminal Petitions are allowed and the proceedings in SC No.153 of 2024 on the file of the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Kadapa, YSR District, against the petitioners herein/A15 & A16 are hereby quashed. No order as to costs. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY Dated: 21.11.2025 PSA 9 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NOS: 13257 and 13258 of 2014 Date: 21.11.2025 PSA