APHC010085152025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1826/2025 Between: Chagarlamudi Madhu Babu ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. KISHORE KUMAR KATARI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The instant petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short “BNNS Act”) has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused, seeking quashment of the proceedings pending against him in C.C.No.61 of 2025 on the file of II Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Vijayawada. 2. Heard Sri Kishore Kumar Katari, learned counsel for the petitioner and C.Panini Somayaji, learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there are no ingredients to attract the offence under Section 323, 506 of IPC. Learned counsel would further submit that continuing criminal proceedings against the petitioner is mere abuse of process of law. Learned counsel would further submit that there is no legal proof though there are allegations to attract the offence alleged. The case has to be quashed. 5. Per Contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that it is not a fit case for quashment. There are specific allegations made against the petitioners to attract the offences punishable under Sections 323 & 506 of IPC. The contentions raised in this petition are matter of defence. This Court while exercising the Jurisdiction under Section 482 cannot decide the same and conduct a mini trial. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor finally prays for dismissal of the petition. 3 6. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the contents of the complaint, as rightly put by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, there are clear allegations made against the petitioners. If there is a prima facie verifiable material which requires investigation at the full length of Trial is present in the case, the case could not be quashed. As rightly put by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, this Court cannot conduct a mini Trial except appreciating the material placed before this Court. The Judgments relied upon by the learned Counsel for the petitioners are not helpful to his case. In that view, the petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. In the result, the petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 20.02.2025 MH 4 146 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.1826 of 2025 Dt.20.02.2025 MH