Allowed

Reddi Bujji v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Mar 2025CRLP/1832/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail sought by a person arrayed as an accused in a forgery and cheating case arising from alleged fraudulent sale of complainant's land. The court found forgery inapplicable to him as a witness to the sale deed and investigation largely complete, and granted anticipatory bail with conditions including periodic appearance before the investigating officer.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond of Rs.20,000 with two like sureties, subject to appearance before IO every Monday and Thursday till filing of charge sheet.

Reddi Bujji Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Cheating and Forgery | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

` lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVAtl 1

¶2

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH, ,, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

:PRESENT:

¶4

,,.|=::I ^` .I

¶5

HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIIVllNAL PETITION NO.I 1832 OF 2025

¶6

Between:

¶7

Reddi BuJ-ji, S/o Jogarao, aged 37 years R/o 1/136B, Kothuru, Pedarama Bhadrapuram payakaraopeta MandaI, AnakapallI- District

¶8

...PetI-tiOnerS/Accused No.7 & 8

¶9

(As per FIR)

¶10

AND

¶11

The State ofAndhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Amaravath i ,

¶12

...Respondent

¶13

t._

¶14

PetitI-On under Section 482 of Cr.P.C is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in memorandum of grounds of criminal petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused Nos.7 & 8 (As per FIR) on Bail in the event of Arrest in Crime No. 317 of 2024 on the file of Nakkapalli Police Station, Anakapalli District by grantl-ng Anticipatory Bail;

¶15

iii= The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petitl'on and memorandum of grounds of criminal petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri T.V.S.Prabhakara Rao, Advocate for the petitioner and Public Prosecutor for the Respondent;

¶16

APHCO10086002025 \

¶17

EREH

¶18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶19

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶20

[3396]

¶21

TuESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶22

PRESENT

¶23

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶24

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1832 OF 2025

Between :

Reddi Bujji

.HPETITIONER/ACCUSED

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶30

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

¶31

1.T V S PRABHAKARA RAO

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

¶33

¶34

The Coult made the following Order:

¶35

This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioners/A7, seeking anticipatory bail, in Crime No.317 of 2024 of Nakkapa'li Police Station, Anakapalli district.

¶36

A case has been registered against the petitioner herein and others for the offences under Sections 467, 464, 419, 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

*--

t'--2te

Dr. VJP, J CrI.P.No. I 832 of2025

¶41

The case of the p;osecutl'on, in brief, I-s that.I

¶42

on 13J 1.2024, at 16 hrs, the complaI-nant reported statl'ng that he

¶43

eke-out hI|S II'Velihood by farming. In December, 2021 he took a loan of Rs.5,00,000/-from one Devavarapu venka Babu/A2, for family needs by provI'ding hI'S land totall'ng to an extent of Ac.8.12y2 Cents as collateral along with orjgI'nal documents, cheques and pronotes. He has repal'd a" the loan amount along with I'nterest. ln return he requested the orI'gjnal documents, cheques and pronotes, but A2, demanded more money wI'th I'ntent to deceI'Ve. After sI'X months, the complajnant checked the Encumbrance certificate (EC) of hI'S land and he came to know that his land was sold away without hIS COnSent to three others and got registered on 28.09.2022. The complaI'nant confronted one of the purchaser and got cancelled the regl-stratjon to an extent of Ac.4.371/2 cents and rema,'nl'ng extent of land had been transferred through GPA granted to one A2 with forged signature of the comp'aJ'nant at the Nakkapalli RegI'Stratl'on Office. on 23.09.2022, the said A2 created fraudulent documents jn his favour. Despite repeated requests, A2 refused to return his document wI'th I-ntent to defraud.

¶44

4, Heard srI' T.V.S.Prabhakara Rao, learned counsel for the

¶45

petl't,'oners and sri Neelothpal Gann learned AssI-Slant Public prosecutor for respondent.

¶46

.-rf

¶47

¶48

Dr.VJP,J Crl.P.No.1832 of2025

¶49

¶50

Learned counsel for the petitioner/A7 would submit that the Petitioner/A7 is the witness on behalf of the purchaser. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the offence of forgery is not applicable against the petitioner being a witness to the sale deed. Learned counsel would further submit that the offence alleged against Al and A2 is that they have forged the signatures of the complainant and sold away the property to A4 and A5. Petitioner has nothing to do with the present transaction. He is ready to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court. The allegation against the accused is that the de facfo complainant obtained loan amount from the accused and kept thel'r property documents, pronotes and cheques, but even after clearing the loan amount, they have not returned the documents. subsequently, they came to know that Al and A2 have created GPA and sold away the property tO third parties. Learned counsel would submit that by this time most of the investigation might have been completed and accordingly Prays tO allow the petition.

¶51

Contra to the same, learned Assistant public Prosecutor would submit that so far 6 witnesses were examined, charge sheet is not filed. It is pending for some more witnesses to examine whether there is any conspiracy between petitioner and the other accused. Learned Assistant

¶52

> Public prosecutor prays to dismiss the petition.

{5ff-±

_` -

Dr.VJP,J Crl.P.No. I 832 of2025

¶57

considering the submissions made and on perusal of the materI'al

¶58

J} on record, as rI'ghtly pleaded by the learned counsel for the petit,'oner that the offence of forgery is not applicable against the petitioner being a witness to the sale deed on behalf of the purchaser. lnvestigatI-On SO far shows 6 witnesses were examI®ned. Hence the question of hampering with the investigation does not arise. under these circumstances, since it is a civil transaction, this court is inclined to grant antjcI-PatOry ba" to the petitioner.

¶59

Accordingly, the petitioner/A7 I'S dl-rected to appear before the concerned Magistrate court within two (2) weeks from today and the petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty fl've thousand only) wl'th two sureties for a ll'ke sum each to the satI'SfaCtiOn Of the Court and the petit]-oner sha" appear before the Investigating officer twice in a week i.e. i.e. on every Monday and Thursday in between 10.00am to o1.00pm till filing of charge sheet.

¶60

Accordingly, the criminal PetitI-On l'S allowed.

¶61

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this criminal petition shall stand closed.

¶62

llTFtUE COPYII ASsDssl:sBcTTCAifeFJGF::I::a:R

¶63

ForASSlslANl l`l__._

¶64

\To,

¶65

The Station House Officer, Nakkapalll® Police Station, Anakapalli Dl-strict

¶66

One CC to Srl'. T.V.S.Prabhakara Rao, Advocate [OPUC]

¶67

Tvio CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP [OUT]

¶68

One spare copy

Jr,

HIGH COURT

VJP,J

DATED:18/03/2025

ORDER

CRLP.No.1832 of 2025

ALLOWED

~~+.-<br>:-S¥.ijji_
`1\ NI\RIltife
;;Tog-.)''':
_,#

Reddi Bujji v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reddi Bujji 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

B Paidi Raju Vs the State of Ap

Mohan Madan Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Sisa Mangalanna Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Shivam Kumar @ Ram Gulam Choudhary Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kanukurthy Hemeswar Rao, Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh

Matram Rama Chandra Rao@Chandra Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh