Disposed

Tanakanti Eswaramma v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC29 Jul 2024CRLP/2426/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused sought quashment of cheating FIR over a property sale, alleging a third party's later title claim did not implicate them. The High Court disposed of the petition without quashing, permitting the investigation to continue and leaving the petitioners free to challenge any charge-sheet if incriminating material emerged.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of without prejudice; liberty to challenge charge-sheet if incriminating material found; miscellaneous petitions closed.

Tanakanti Eswaramma Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Quashing and FIR | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY

¶2

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2426 OF 2022

¶5

Between:

¶6

Tanakanti Eswaramma, W/o T. Kishtappa Aged about 62 years, Occ. House wife R/o.D.No.29/81, Gramapanchayti Street, Tanakal (VandM) Ananthapuram Town, Ananthapuram District

¶7

Tanakanti Kishtappa, S/o T. Pedda Narasimhulu Aged about 70 years, Occ. Agriculture R/o.D.No.29/81, Gramapanchayti Street, Tanakal (VandM) Ananthapuram Town, Ananthapuram District

¶8

Tanakanti Madhu, S/o T. Kishtappa Aged about 34 years, Occ. Agriculture R/o.D.No.29/81, Gramapanchayti Street, Tanakal (VandM) Ananthapuram Town, Ananthapuram District

¶9

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED{S)

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amravati

¶12

Korra Rama Murthy Naik S/o Kuallayi Naik Aged about 29 years. R/o.Penugundu Thanda Tanakal Mandal Ananthapuram District

¶13

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS

¶14

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to quash the entire proceedings in GgeNo.21 of 2022 on the file of Tanakal Police Station, Ananthapuram^District.

¶15

¶16

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2022

¶17

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including the arrest of the petitioners/Accused in^FIRNo.21 of 2022 on the file of Tanakal Police Station, Ananthapuram District. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing^{theMemorandum} of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri S Krishna Reddy ,Advocate for the Petitioner and^{thePublicProsecutor} (AP) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of None Appeared for the Respondent No.2 The Court made the following Order:

[3396]

I «

APHC010124652022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶23

TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶24

PRESENT

¶25

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA r.RIMINAL PETITION NO: 2426/2022

¶26

Between; ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) Tanakanti Eswaramma and Others AND ...RESPONDENT/COI/lPLAINANT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S);

¶28

1.S KRISHNA REDDY

¶29

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S); 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

The instant Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of^Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed, by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3, seeking quashment of the proceedings against them ini Crime No.21 of 2022 of Tanakal Police Station, Ananthapuram District, registered^{fortheoffence} under Section 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal^Code,1860. punishable 2. Heard Sri N.Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for the^Petitioners, 3. Leaned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that Petitioners^who are Accused Nos.1 to 3 sold the subject property to^{RespondentNo.2byway} of registered sale deed in the year 2016. It is alleged^{againstthePetitioners} that they have cheated Respondent No.2 since one 3'" party claimed^thathe

¶32

¶33

has purchased the subject property in the year 2012. Learned counsel further would submit that without examining the important aspects as to the claim of the 3'^^ party, which was made after eight years of execution of the registered sale deed of the Petitioners, this case has been lodged by Respondent No.2. 4. Ms.D.Prasanna Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State/Respondent No.1 is in attendance. 5. On perusal of the record, it appears because of the stay, there is no progress in the investigation. As rightly put by learned counsel for the Petitioners, the claim of the 3'"^ party require further examination to prove the innocence or otherwise of the Petitioners. 6. In that view, the Criminal Petition is disposed of, without causing any prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3. However, the Petitioners are at liberty to challenge the charge sheet, if any incriminating material found against the Petitioners while concluding the investigation.

¶34

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶35

SD/- B PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

The Tanakal Police Station, Ananthapuram District.

¶41

One CC to Sri. S krishna Reddy, Advocate [OPUC;

¶42

Two CC to Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amravati

¶43

[OUT]

¶44

Three CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:30/07/2024

ORDER

CRLP.No.2426 of 2022

cT
m
X 2 5 OCT 23211 C9
^ Current Section ^

¶51

THE CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSED OF

Tanakanti Eswaramma v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tanakanti Eswaramma 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

M.S.v.C.Varma Vs Vice Chairman and Manging Director

Ganapaneni Siva Srinivasa Rao Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Sk Khader Basha Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Thirumalasetty Kondaiah Vs The State of A.P

Thirumalasetty Kondaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Vajarapu Savithri at Sayamma Vs Neelapu Murali Mohan Reddi at Murali Reddi