APHC010443462026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE 24th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7382 OF 2026 Between: 1. Gandreti Chandu, S/o.Ganesh, Aged about 25years, R/o.SC Colony, Modavalasa Village,Denkada Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 2. Korada Nagaraju, S/o. Srinu, Aged about 27 years,R/o.SC Colony, Modavalasa Village, DenkadaMandal, Vizianagaram District 3. Gandreti Bharath Kumar, S/o.Ganesh, Aged about 22 years, R/o.SC Colony, Modavalasa Village,Denkada Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 4. Gandreti Krishnam Raju alias Krishna, S/o. late Suryanarayana, Aged about 40 years, R/o.SCColony, Modavalasa Village, Denkada Mandal,Vizianagaram District. 5. Gandreti Bangarraju, S/o.late Suryanarayana Suri, Aged about 45 years, R/o.SC Colony,Modavalasa Village, Denkada Mandal,Vizianagaram District 2 6. Udikala Bangarraju, S/o.Abaddam, Aged about 27years, R/o.SC Colony, Modavalasa Village,Denkada Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 7. Mylapalli Padma, W/o.late Fdiraju, Aged about 48 years, R/o.SC Colony, Modavalasa Village,Denkada Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 8. Mylapalli Ravi Kumar alias Ravi, S/o.Pydiraju, Aged about 31 years, R/o.SC Colony, ModavalasaVillage, Denkada Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 9. Gandreti Bangarraju alias Mestri, S/o.late Narasimhulu, Aged about 43 years, R/o.SC Colony,Modavalasa Village, Denkada Mandal,Vizianagaram District. 10. Deepilli Dileep, S/o.Venkatarao, Aged about 25years, R/o.SC Colony, Modavalasa Village,Denkada Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 11. Rella Pydiraju, W/o.Srinivasarao, Aged about 37years, R/o.SC Colony, Madhavadhara,Visaldiapatnam District. 12. Vankara Gowri alias Laila, W/o.Shyamalarao, Aged about 29 years, Pedda Veedhi, Jonnaguddi,Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 3 13. Mylapalli Priya Boni Priya, W/o.Mylapalli RaviKumar, Aged about 27 years, R/o.SC Colony,Modavalasa Village, Denkada Mandal,Vizianagaram District. 14. Vankara Shyamalarao alias Shyam, S/o.Gurumurthy,Aged about 37 years, R/o.Pedda Veedhi,Jonnaguddi, Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi, Nelapadu, Guntur District. 2. Potnuru Neelavathi, Women Sub-Inspector of Police,Vizianagaram I Town Police,Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. ...Respondents 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 Pleased to quash the proceedings in CC.No. 389 of 2026 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram District and pass 4 IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 Pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in CC.No. 389 of 2026 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram District including appearance of the petitioners, pending disposal of the Criminal Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioners: P DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO:7382 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: Instant Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of the petitioners herein (A1 to A14), seeking to quash the proceedings in CC No.389 of 2026 on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram District, for the offences punishable under Sections 132 and 351(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent- State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, after arguing for some time, has confined his argument to the extent of dispensing with the presence of the petitioners before the trial Court by submitting petitioners’ practical constraints in attending before the trial Court and states that petitioners shall not dispute their identity at a later stage of proceedings. 6 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contended that specific accusations have been made as against the petitioners herein and truth or otherwise of the said accusations has to be decided during the course of trial, hence, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings at this stage. So far as dispensing with the presence of the petitioners, before the trial Court, he has not opposed the same. 5. Since there are specific accusations that have been made as against the petitioners herein, which are all disputed questions of fact, the same can be decided during the course of trial, and this Court, in a petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 corresponding to Section 482 Cr.P.C., would not be in a position to conduct roving enquiry into the disputed questions of fact and quash the proceedings at this stage. 6. In this context, it is apt to note the dictum held in State of Uttar Pradesh and Another Vs. Akhil Sharda and Others1, by the Apex Court in its vivid terms in the following way: 7. Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court by which the High Court has set aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it appears that the High 1 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 594 7 Court has virtually conducted a mini trial, which as such is not permissible at this stage and while deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. As observed and held by this Court in a catena of decisions no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., jurisdiction and at the stage of deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court cannot get into appreciation of evidence of the particular case being considered. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein. However, due to ground realities submitted by the counsel for the petitioners, presence of the petitioners herein before the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram District, in CC No.389 of 2026 is hereby dispensed with, except on those dates when the learned trial Court feels that their presence is necessary. In the event of failure of the petitioners to appear when the trial Court specifically directs, this Order shall stands automatically revoked, without recourse to this Court. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. 9. Needless to state that the petitioners are at liberty to raise all the grounds before the trial Court. 8 Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 24.08.2026 PSA 9 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO:7382 of 2026 Date: 24.08.2026 PSA