APHC010141512026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2180/2026 Between: PUNNATI SHIVA KUMARI, W/O YOGA @ YAGA KOUSHIK REDDY, AGED ABOUT 36YEARS, OCC HOUSE-MAKER, RIO. PUNNATIVARIPALLI VILLAGE, OBULAVARIPALLI MANDAL, KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT. 2. YOGA YAGA KOUSHIK REDDY, S/O.BALA KONDA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, RIO. D.NO.1/94, ANANTHAPADMANABHA STREET, PATHA KADAPA, YSR KADAPA, N/O. GATTUMIDIPALLI VILLAGE, NANDALURU MANDAL. 3. YAGA BALA KONDA REDDY, S/O RAGHAVA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 66YEARS, OCC CA, GATTUMIDIPALLI VILLAGE, NANDALURU MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT GANGANAGAR, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA STATE. 4. YAGA SANKAR REDDY SIVA SANKAR REDDY, S/O RAGHAVA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 56YEARS, GATTUMIDIPALLI VILLAGE, NANDALURU MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 5. YAGA SUJAMANI, W/O KOMMANA SUDHAKAR REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60YEARS, RIO. KOLIMI STREET, NUNEVARIPALLI VILLAGE, RAJAMPET MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT 2 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.2180 of 2026 Dated 18.03.2026 ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: G V V S VARA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.,’)/Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) seeking to quash proceedings against petitioner/de-facto complainant in Crl.M.P.No.646 of 2025 in C.C.No.16 of 2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Railway Kodur, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘the IPC’). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. Notice on respondent Nos. 2 to 5/Accused Nos.1 to 4 is not required, inasmuch as this Court intends to dispose of the matter granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the learned jurisdictional Magistrate by way of filing a protest petition under Section 190 read with Section 200 of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’/Section 210 read with Section 223 of ‘the BNSS’. 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.2180 of 2026 Dated 18.03.2026 4. The petitioner has filed an application under Section 178(8) of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ seeking further investigation in the matter. The petitioner, being the de-facto complainant, lodged a complaint with the Station House Officer, Obulavaripalli Police Station, and the same was registered as a case in Crime No.193 of 2021 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 506 read with 34 of ‘the IPC’ against respondent Nos.2 to 5. After thorough investigation, the Investigating Officer has filed a charge sheet for the above said offences. 5. The petitioner, having felt aggrieved by the manner in which the investigation is conducted and that the Investigating Officer has not filed a charge sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 417 and 384 of ‘the IPC’, has filed the present application seeking further investigation. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.2/Accused No.1 is an important person and, knowing that fact, he proposed and came forward for conducting the marriage with the petitioner. It is further submitted that the accused also threatened the petitioner with dire consequences. 6. In fact, in the petition, the petitioner has not mentioned any details as to how and why further investigation is required to be conducted. There are no reasons mentioned for seeking further investigation in the case. It is 4 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.2180 of 2026 Dated 18.03.2026 only stated that the investigation was not done on the aspects mentioned in the complaint. 7. Be that as it may, the petitioner has an alternative efficacious remedy by filing a protest petition before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate seeking appropriate action. Though the learned Magistrate has got ample power to order further investigation, such further investigation could only be granted under specified circumstances. 8. The learned Magistrate has rightly mentioned in the docket order dated 06.01.2026 that the petition was filed only to delay the proceedings and that, by way of filing such petition, the nature of the litigation would take another turn. Further, the petition was filed at a belated stage, as the case was coming up for framing of charges. The learned Magistrate has also rightly pointed out that there was no delivery of property so as to attract the offences punishable under Sections 417 or 384 of ‘the IPC’. 9. Further, it has to be pointed out that, in the course of examination of prosecution witnesses, if any threats are alleged to have been committed and deposed by the prosecution witnesses, the learned Magistrate has got ample power to add or alter the sections of law by invoking the powers under Section 216 of ‘the Cr.P.C’/Section 239 of ‘the BNSS’. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there are no merits to order further investigation. However, the Criminal Petition is 5 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.2180 of 2026 Dated 18.03.2026 disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the learned jurisdictional Magistrate by way of filing a protest petition under Section 190 read with Section 200 of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’/Section 210 read with Section 223 of ‘the BNSS’. 11. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 18.03.2026 RSI 6 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.2180 of 2026 Dated 18.03.2026 107 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.2180 of 2026 Date: 18.03.2026 RSI