Tunga Nageswara Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Tunga Nageswara Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Criminal Petition disposed of despite being devoid of merits, with direction that the Petitioners' presence before the learned Trial Court stands dispensed with unless attendance specifically required; as a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Criminal Petition seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.27 of 2021 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narsapuram, can be entertained.

Court's answer

On perusal of the record, including the complaint lodged by Respondent No.2 and her Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement, specific allegations have been levelled against the Petitioners.

Ratio / Principle

The Criminal Petition seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.27 of 2021 cannot be entertained; the petition is devoid of merits.

Key takeaways

While disposing of the Criminal Petition, the presence of the Petitioners before the learned Trial Court stands dispensed with unless their attendance is specifically required by the learned Trial Court for any purpose.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition (No. 12439/2025) by three accused (Tunga Nageswara Rao, Tunga Vijay, Tirumala Ramesh Nani) seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.27 of 2021 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narsapuram, arising from the complaint of Respondent No.2 (Kadali Lakshmi): Held, on perusal of the record, including the complaint lodged by Respondent No.2 and her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., specific allegations stand levelled against the Petitioners; the Criminal Petition cannot be entertained and is devoid of merits. However, taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the Criminal Petition is disposed of with a direction that the presence of the Petitioners before the learned Trial Court shall stand dispensed with, unless their attendance is specifically required by the learned Trial Court for any purpose; pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand closed.

[3521]

APHC010629042025

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

TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12439/2025

Between:

1.TUNGA NAGESWARA RAO, S/O TRIMURTHULU., HINDU, MALE, AGE 52 YEARS, KADIMIPUNTHA, H/O GUMPARRU, YELAMANCHILI MANDAL MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P,

2.TUNGA VIJAY, S/O TRIMURTHULU, HINDU, MALE, AGE 30 YEARS, KADIMIPUNTHA, H/O GUMPARRU,YELAMANCHILI MANDAL MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P

3.TIRUMALA RAMESH NANI, S/O VENKATESWARA RAO., HINDU, MALE, AGE 28 YEARS, KADIMIPUNTHA, H/O GUMPARRU, YELAMANCHILI MANDAL MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)

AND

1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI.

2.KADALI LAKSHMI, W/O NAGESWARA RAOHINDU, FEMALE, AGE 44 YEARS, R/O KADIMIPUNTHA, H/O GUMPARRU YELAMANCHILI MANDAL MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P,

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

1.SARASCHANDRA BABU JAKKAMSETTY

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

2

1.VALLEPU PAVAN KUMAR

2.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

No representation for Respondent No.2 even though notice on Respondent No.2 is served.

Sri V.Pavan Kumar, learned Counsel is appointed as learned Legal Aid Counsel for Respondent No.2. Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee is directed to issue necessary proceedings in this regard.

Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Legal Aid Counsel for Respondent No.2 and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 4. On perusal of the record, including the complaint lodged by Respondent No.2 and her statement recorded under Section 161 of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ it is evident that specific allegations have been levelled against the Petitioners.

In view of the aforesaid material, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Criminal Petition seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.27 of 2021 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narsapuram, cannot be entertained. The petition is devoid of merits.

However, taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the Criminal Petition is disposed of, with a direction that the presence of the Petitioners before the learned Trial Court shall stand dispensed with, unless their attendance is specifically required by the learned Trial Court for any purpose.

3

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand

closed.

_________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J

Dated: 03.02.2026 VTS