Chllagundla Srikanth @ Challagundla Sreekanth Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

APHC010067252025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3368] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1546/2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

CHLLAGUNDLA SRIKANTH @ CHALLAGUNDLA SREEKANTH, S/O LAKSHMI NARAYANA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/O D NO 620/1, KOTHA GANESUNIPADU VILLAGE MACHAVARAM MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT A.P -522413. (A1)

¶9

NARENDRA @ PALLA NARENDRA BABU, S/O VENKATESWARLU AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/O KOTHA GANESUNIPADU VILLAGE MACHAVARAM MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT A.P-522413 (A2)

¶10

DIYYA RAMAKRISHNA @ DIYYA RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, S/O VENKATA RAO AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/O D NO 691 BANDLA BAZAAR PIDUGURALLA TOWN PALNADU DISTRICT A.P-522413 (A3).

¶11

CHALLAGUNDLA BIKSHAMAIAH, S/O RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/O D NO 609 KOTHA GANESUNIPADU VILLAGE MACHAVARAM MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT A.P-522413 (A4).

¶12

PONDURI NARASIMHARAO, S/O SURYA NARAYANA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/O D NO 120 KOTHA GANESUNIPADU VILLAGE MACHAVARAM MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT A.P-522413 (A5)

¶13

GANGA PRASAD @ VEERAPANENI GANGAPRASAD, S/O BHADRAIAH AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/O D NO 310/1 KOTHA GANESUNIPADU VILLAGE MACHAVARAM MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT A.P522413 (A6).

¶14

CHALLAGUNDLA BHASKAR RAO @ BHASKARA RAO, S/O VENKATESWARLU AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/O KOTHA GANESUNIPADU VILLAGE MACHAVARAM MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT A.P-522413 (A7).

¶15

2

¶16

CHALLAGUNDLA SRIDHAR, S/O LAKSHMINARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O 1-1-385/5/1, MOHAN NAGAR, KOTTAPETA, CHAITANYA PURI, SAROOR NAGAR, K.V RANGA REDDY T.G-500035. (A8).

¶17

GANGINENI ANIL KUMAR, S/O HANUMANTHA RAO AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/O D NO 7194/A KOTHA GANESUNIPADU VILLAGE MACHAVARAM MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT A.P-522413 (A9).

¶18

KANDRAKUNTA SAGAR, S/O SRINIVASA RAO AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCC PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/O.7162, KOTHA GANESUNIPADU VILLAGE MACHAVARAM MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, A.P-522413 (A10).

¶19

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND

¶20

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH P.S., MACHAVARAM, PALNADU DISTRICT, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI.

¶21

CHOWDARY SINGARAIAH, S/O GURAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, OCC FARMER, R/O MALLAVOLU VILLAGE, MACHAVARAM MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT A.P-522413

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

¶23

1.PONNEKANTI MALLIKARJUNA RAO

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

¶25

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

¶26

2.POPURI LAKSHMI PRIYANVITA

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

3

¶29

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL PETITION No.1546 OF 2025

¶30

COMMON ORDER:

¶31

I.A.Nos.2 & 3 OF 2025

¶32

in/and Criminal Petition No:1546 OF 2025

¶33

This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed on behalf of the petitioners herein/A-1 to A-10 to quash the proceedings in Cr.No.36 of 2024 of Station House Officer, Machavaram Police Station, Palnadu District, registered for the offence U/secs.120-B, 143, 147, 148, 341, 307, 427, 506 r/w.149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶34

Heard Sri P.Mallikarjuna Rao, learned counsel for petitioners/A-1 to A-10 and Sri P.Lakshmi Priyanvita, learned counsel representing for the unofficial respondent No.2 (defactocomplainant). Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State present. Police present.

¶35

Today, when the matter is taken up, petitioners herein/A-1 to A-10 and 2^nd respondent herein are present before this Court. The petitioners/A-1 to A-10 and 2^nd respondent produced their respective Aadhaar cards in proof of their identity. Learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for 2^nd respondent and police have identified both the parties in the open Court.

¶36

4

¶37

This Court has questioned 2^nd respondent herein/ de facto complainant with regard to compromise, and he categorically stated to that extent that he has voluntarily entered into compromise with the petitioners herein/A-1 to A-10. This Court is satisfied with the identification of the parties and voluntariness in arriving at the compromise. In view of the compromise between the parties, the chances of conviction are remote and bleak.

¶38

In the light of judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another¹ , on quashing of criminal case, when the parties entered into settlement and compromise, the Criminal Petition is allowed and therefore, the case proceedings in Cr.No.36 of 2024 of Station House Officer, Machavaram Police Station, Palnadu District, registered for the offence U/secs.120-B, 143, 147, 148, 341, 307, 427, 506 r/w.149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the petitioners herein/A-1 to A-10 is hereby quashed.

¶39