Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6261 (AP)

NAINAPATRUNI @ NAINIPEDDI SURYANARAYANA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

CRLP/721/2024 · 2025-08-11

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010056382024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 721/2024 Between: 1. NAINAPATRUNI @ NAINIPEDDI SURYANARAYANA, AGED 71 YEARS, S/O. LATE SATYANARAYANA, R/O. CHINNAVEEDHI, BODDEPALLI, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. PAIDI APPA RAO,, S/O. LATE SUIYANARAYANA, AGED 71 YEARS, R/O. MAIN VEEDHI, PANASAPETA, WALTERU, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. PAIDI DHARMA RAO,, C/O. PAIDI APPA RAO, AGED 31 YEARS, R/O.2-57, CHINNAVEEDHI, CHINNA BODDEPALLI, BODDEPALLI , SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY SHO PS SOMPETA, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P,AMARAVATHI. 2. BODDEPALLI SYAMALA, W/O TEJESWASWA RAO AGED 45 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE R/O BODDEPALLI, PONDURU MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. TOTA TEJESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. P RAJKUMAR 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed, by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3, seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.312 of 2023 on the file of Ponduru Police Station, 2 Srikakulam District registered for the offences under Sections 354 and 323 read with 34 IPC. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that investigation in the present crime has been completed and charge sheet has also been filed. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would further submit that there are specific allegations against the Petitioners and hence, this is not a fit case for quashment. 3. Sri Tota Tejeswara Rao, learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the petition may be disposed of dispensing with the presence of the Petitioners before the trial Court. 4. Sri P.Rajkumar, learned counsel for Respondent No.2 is in attendance. 5. In that view, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. However, considering the age of the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2, their presence before the trial Court is dispensed with, except on the specific dates as directed by the trial Court. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:12.08.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.721 of 2024 Dt.12.08.2025 Dinesh