Dismissed

Velivela Basava Poornnamma, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Sept 2021CRLP/4814/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quash of charge sheet. It held that prima facie evidence of forgery exists and disputed questions of fact require trial, making quashing inappropriate.

What did the court decide?

The criminal proceedings against the petitioners on the basis of the material available were not quashed; the criminal petition was dismissed as it lacked merits.

Velivela Basava Poornnamma, Vs The State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY CRIMINAL PETITION No.4814 of 2021

¶2

ORDER:-

¶3

This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) is filed seeking quash of charge sheet in C.C.No.686 of 2019 on the file of learned VI Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada City.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶5

The petitioners are accused in the above C.C.No.686 of 2019 on the file of learned VI Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada City. They are facing prosecution for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “I.P.C.”). On a report lodged by the de facto complainant that the petitioners have indulged in forging a document namely family member certificate, initially a case in Crime No.374 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 468 of I.P.C. was registered by Penamaluru police and the same was investigated. Eventually, on completion of investigation, the Investigation Officer has filed charge sheet. The said case is now pending trial before the trial Court.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners sought quash of the said criminal proceedings against the petitioners on the ground that vague allegations are ascribed both in the F.I.R. and also in the charge sheet and no case is made out against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 468 of I.P.C. Further, pointing out certain infirmities in the investigation, he would pray for quash of the said criminal proceedings.

¶7

¶8

A reading of the contents of the F.I.R. prima facie discloses commission of offences relating to forgery of a document. The Investigation Officer has collected material during the course of investigation in proof of complicity of petitioners in commission of the said offences and filed the charge sheet. Therefore, the matter requires trial to find out the truth or otherwise of the said allegations. Evidence has to be adduced before the trial Court and the trial Court has to appreciate the said evidence in the final adjudication of the case and decide culpability or otherwise of the petitioners in commission of the said offences. This Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., cannot go into the disputed question of facts in a petition filed seeking quash of the criminal proceedings. As already noticed supra, the matter requires trial to decide the contentious issues involved in the matter.

¶9

Therefore, this Court absolutely do not see any valid legal ground warranting its interference under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceedings that are now initiated against the petitioners on the basis of the material available on record.

¶10

Therefore, this Criminal Petition lacks merits and it is dismissed.

¶11

Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in the Criminal Petition, shall stand closed.

¶12

____________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

¶13

Date: 01-09-2021 ARR

¶14

¶15

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

¶16

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4814 of 2021

¶17

Date: 01-09-2021

¶18

ARR

Velivela Basava Poornnamma, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Velivela Basava Poornnamma, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sirisi Palli Satyanarayan Vs The State of Andrapardesh

N.Jaya Lakhmi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Bhukya Venkateswara Naik Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Duttala Srinivasa Reddy Vs Arikatla Chinna Sunki Reddy

G Narasimha Reddy at Narasimha Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Biddika Simhachalam, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh