Dismissed

K Balaji v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Sept 2026CRLP/6963/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought to quash FIR Cr.No.242/2026 registered at Tirupati Urban Police Station. During hearing, counsel for the petitioner requested permission to withdraw the criminal petition with liberty to pursue other legal remedies. The State raised no objection. The court permitted withdrawal and dismissed the petition as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Criminal petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to pursue other legal remedies; interlocutory applications closed.

K Balaji Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Bail and Remand | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

APHC010423072026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

FRIDAY, THE 18^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6963 OF 2026

¶6

Between:

¶7

K Balaji, S/o. late.,Aged about 56 years , Working as SubRegister R/o D.No.15-982/2,Dhanalakshmi Nagar, Near Kalasam Building Avilala Tirupati,Tirupati District.

¶8

...Petitioner

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi.

¶11

Arcot Balaji, S/o Late A. Lakshmana Rao,Aged about 70 years old, R/o. D.No. 32/2 ,Ground floor,JP Nagar, Bengaluru - 560062

¶12

...Respondents Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtmay be pleased to call for the records in Cr.No.242 of 2026 On the file of the Tirupati Urban Police Station, Tirupathi, Tirupati Districtand quash the same and pass such

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

FIR in Cr.No.242 of 2026 On the file of the Tirupati Urban Police Station, Tirupathi, Tirupati Districtand pass such

¶17

IA NO: 2 OF 2026

¶18

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to stay all further proceedings Cr.No.242 of 2026 On the file of the Tirupati Urban Police Station, Tirupathi, Tirupati District in pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition and pass such

¶19

IA NO: 3 OF 2026

¶20

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to permit me to amend the name of the Urban Police station as Tiruchanur Urban Police Station instead of Tirupati Urban Police Station in paragraph Nos. 2,4 and 9 to 11 and in the Affidavit as well as in I.A.No.01 & 02 of 2026 and pass

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: S PARINEETA Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶22

¶23

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶24

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6963 of 2026

¶25

The Court made the following Order:

¶26

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned

¶27

counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present Criminal Petition, with a liberty to work out legal remedies in accordance with the law.

¶28

2. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of

¶29

respondent-State expressed no objection for the same.

¶30

3. Permission is accorded.

¶31

4. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed as

¶32

withdrawn, with a liberty to work out legal remedies in accordance with the law.

¶33

Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand

¶34

closed.

¶35

____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶36

Date: 18.09.2026 PSA

¶37

¶38

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶39

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6963 of 2026

¶40

Date: 18.09.2026

¶41

PSA

K Balaji v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K Balaji v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases