Dismissed

Medipalli Jhansi rani, v. State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Sept 2021CRLP/4889/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Petition seeking quashing of FIR alleging previous litigations and false claims. Court held previous cases are not sufficient ground for quash. Since cognizable offences exist, investigation must proceed. Petitioner's petition dismissed; Section 41A Cr.P.C. directed.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Petition is dismissed; no investigation interference. Direction given to Investigation Officer to follow Section 41A Cr.P.C. due to potential sentence below 7 years.

Medipalli Jhansi rani, Vs State of Ap — Quashing and FIR | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY CRIMINAL PETITION No.4889 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 the F.I.R. in Crime No.806 of 2020 of Penamaluru Police Station, Krishna District.

¶4

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

¶5

On a report lodged by the 2^nd respondent, who is the de facto complainant alleging that the petitioners have wrongfully restrained her, threatened her with dire consequences and behaved indecently, a case under Sections 341, 509, 506, 290 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “I.P.C.”), was registered in Crime No.806 of 2020 by Penamaluru police against the petitioners. The said case is now under investigation.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that there are previous civil and criminal cases between both the parties and only to wreak vengeance against the petitioners, that the present report was lodged with all false allegations and the petitioners were falsely implicated in the above crime. He would also submit that the offences registered against the petitioners are all noncognizable offences and the F.I.R. is registered without any prior permission of the concerned Magistrate and as such, it is not valid. Therefore, on the aforesaid grounds, the petitioners sought quash of the F.I.R. registered against them.

¶7

As can be seen from the contents of the F.I.R., prima facie , they disclose commission of a cognizable offence along with other

¶8

¶9

offences. Whether the said allegations are false or not, is the matter to be ascertained during the course of investigation. Therefore, the matter requires investigation to ascertain the truth or otherwise of the said allegations. Mere fact that there are previous litigations both civil and criminal between both the parties, is not a valid ground for quash of the F.I.R.

¶10

As regards the contention that the offences are noncognizable and F.I.R. cannot be registered without prior permission of the concerned Magistrate is concerned, as can be seen from the F.I.R., the crime was also registered for the offence punishable under Section 509 of I.P.C. which is a cognizable offence. Therefore, it cannot be said that registration of F.I.R. is not valid without prior permission of the Court.

¶11

In the said facts and circumstances of the case, there are no valid legal grounds emanating from the record warranting interference of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. either to quash the F.I.R. or to interdict the investigation. So, the criminal petition lacks merit.

¶12

Therefore, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.

¶13

However, as the offences registered against the petitioners are punishable with less than seven (07) years period of imprisonment, the Investigation Officer shall follow the procedure contemplated under Section 41A Cr.P.C.

¶14

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

¶15

JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

¶16

Date: 02-09-2021 ARR

¶17

¶18

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

¶19

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4889 of 2021

¶20

Date: 02-09-2021

¶21

ARR

Medipalli Jhansi rani, v. State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Medipalli Jhansi rani, v. State of Ap

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

Duttala Srinivasa Reddy Vs Arikatla Chinna Sunki Reddy

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

Velivela Basava Poornnamma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri G.Narayana Yadav, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kakasi Eswaramma Vs The Secretary

Dammalapati Srinivas, Vs The State of Andhra Prasdesh