APHC010263552017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3239] FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7889/2017 Between: 1. B.RANGA RAO, S/O. SEETHARAMANJANEYULU, AGED 77 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.11-112, KATTA SUBBA RAO, THOTA, GAVARAVARAM, SANIVARAPU PETA PANCHAYAT, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. STATE OF A P REP BY P P ANOTHER, THROUGH INSPECTOR OF POLICE-SHO, TANUKU CIRCLE, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD. 2. THE MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, VELPURU ROAD, TANUKU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, REP BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, SRI K.S.V.R.SRAVANA KUMAR. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court to call for the records relating to and C.C.No.188 of 2017 on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tanuku, West Godavari District, and quash the same so far as petitioner/A.4 is concerned, and pass. IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRLPMP 8338 OF 2017 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in C.C.No.188 of 2017 on the file of II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tanuku, West Godavari 2 District, including appearance of the petitioner/A.4, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition and pass. IA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased May be pleased to extend the Interim order Dt 29/08/2017 pending disposed of the above Criminal Petition and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to receive documents 1) Dt.03.02.2000 empanelment order, 2) Dt.07.11.2009 Valuation report, 3) Dt.23.11.2009 Legal opinion, 4) Dt.20.11.2009 Inspector report, 5) Dt.08.12.2009 Due diligence report, as additional evidence to reach a just conclusion in this matter and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings including his appearance pending disposal of the above Crl.P. IA NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to extend the interim order dt: 29.08.2017 passed in CRLP No. 7889/2017 and pass IA NO: 3 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to extend the interim order dt: 29.08.2017 passed in Crl.P.No.7889/2017 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. D S N V PRASAD BABU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO:7889 of 2017 The Court made the following Order: Accused No.4 in CC No.188 of 2017 on the file of the Court of the learned II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tanuku, West Godavari District filed the present Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings insofar as he is concerned. 2. Charge sheet was filed against A1 to A7 alleging offences under Sections 120B, 420, 468 and 471 R/w 34 IPC. 3. Case of the prosecution briefly is as follows: i) A1 obtained a loan in the year 2009 from Union Bank of India, Tanuku Branch for the purpose of working capital for his Fish Tanks in an extent of Ac.16.00 Cents situated in RS No.384/1B of Likhitapudi Village, Narasapur Mandal, West Godavari District. A2 introduced A1 to the bank, who is a panel advocate for Union Bank of India, Tanuku. Along with loan application, A1 furnished photocopy of registered Sale Deed No.4198 of 2008 dated 18.11.2008 and photocopy of registered Sale Deed No.2556 of 2002 dated 15.09.2002. A3 who is a legal advisor for Union Bank of India, Tanuku Branch furnished his 4 legal opinion enclosing all the certificates to A1. Thereafter, the bank authorities sent all the documents to the petitioner who is a panel valuator of Union Bank of India, Tanuku Branch. On the basis of documents furnished by the Bank, after inspection, the petitioner gave valuation certificate. ii) While so, in the month of June, 2011, when the bank authorities were engaged in recovery process of the overdue loan amounts, it came to light that the documents produced by A1 were fake and fabricated documents. It is alleged that A1 obtained loan by producing fake and fabricated documents. During the course of investigation, the police arrested A1 on 24.08.2012 and recorded his confession statement wherein he stated that he colluded with A2 to A4 on different dates and different stages, created fake and fabricated documents and obtained loan in a fraudulent manner. iii) On the basis of confession statement of A1, the petitioner who is a panel valuator of the Bank was implicated as A4. After completion of investigation, the Police filed charge sheet and the case is numbered as CC No.188 of 2017 on the file of the Court of the learned II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tanuku, West Godavari District. 5 4. Sri D.S.N.V.Prasad Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that during the course of investigation, the Investigating Agency has not collected any material against the petitioner, except the so-called confession statement made by A1. He contends that there is no allegation in the charge sheet that the petitioner is responsible for creating fake and fabricated documents. He further contends that it is the bank officials who sent all the documents to the petitioner, for valuation and there is no allegation that A1 produced these documents before the petitioner. He further contends that except the so-called confession made by co-accused i.e., A1, there is no other material adduced by the prosecution. As such, he contends that the present proceedings against the petitioner is nothing but abuse of process of law. 5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that except the confession statement made by A1 before the Investigating Officer, no other material was there on record. He further contends that it can be taken as a prima facie case for launching prosecution against the petitioner and this Court could not quash the proceedings by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 6 6. This Court perused the entire material available on record. 7. Admittedly, petitioner is a panel valuator for Union Bank of India, Tanuku Branch. It is also admitted fact that bank authorities sent all the documents to the petitioner, for obtaining valuation report. Admittedly, even according to the prosecution, there is no allegation in the entire charge sheet that the petitioner is in any way responsible for creating fake and fabricated documents by A1. Admittedly, petitioner is no way benefited with the alleged fake and fabricated documents. The ultimate beneficiary is A1 but not the petitioner. As on today, except the confession made by A1, who is co-accused, there is no other material on record against the petitioner. As such, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner is nothing but abuse of process of law. 8. In the result, Criminal Petition is allowed. Proceedings against the petitioner herein/A4 alone in CC No.188 of 2017 on the file of the Court of learned II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tanuku, West Godavari District is hereby quashed. No order as to costs. 9. However, it is made clear that during the course of trial, if the prosecution could able to get any evidence with regard to 7 involvement of the petitioner herein in the present case, they are at liberty to invoke Section 319 Cr.P.C. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY Dated: 13.02.2026 PSA 8 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7889 of 2017 Date: 13.02.2026 PSA