Court disposed of criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. without arresting petitioner directing police to complete investigation and file final report relying on earlier order.
Petitioner not to be arrested; police to complete investigation and file final report either way.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY
CRL.P.No.468 of 2012
ORDER
This criminal petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by A22 in Cr.No.336 of 2009 of Nandigama Police Station, Krishna District registered for the offences under Sections 468, 471, 408 and 420 IPC, to quash the proceeding therein.
The accusation leveled against the petitioner is that she raised a loan of Rs.25,000/- from P.A.C.S. of Adaviravulapadu Village without her possessing any land and out of the loan granted to her, she received Rs.15,000/-, whereas A1, who is responsible for release of the amount, received Rs.10,000/-.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that A1-Kotharu Jaya Suryam approached this Court for quashing the proceedings by moving Crl.P.No.13242 of 2011 and the said petition came to be disposed of on 19-12-2011 directing the respondent to complete the investigation and that the petitioner herein
seeks the same relief. The relief granted to A1 in Crl.P.No.13242 of 2011 reads as hereunder:
“This Court is of the view that even though the confession is not admissible in law, the same can be relied upon by the Investigating Officer for the purpose of securing the accused. Hence, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.
However, the respondent police are directed to complete the investigation of the case without arresting the petitioner and to file the final report either way.
With the above observations, this criminal petition is disposed of.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal petition shall stand closed.”
Since the case of the petitioner stands on better footing than that of A1, she deserves the same relief.
Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of directing the first respondent-police to complete the investigation of the case without arresting the petitioner and to file the final report either way.
__________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J
rkk Dated: 17-2-2012
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash criminal proceedings against the petitioner for cheating and forgery offences.
Whether the petitioner deserves the same relief granted to another petitioner in a related case.
Whether the investigation should be completed without arresting the petitioner.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Crl.P.No.13242 of 2011Referred¶10
2 provisions across 2 enactments
A22
R-1 State
R-2 Police
B.Seshasayana Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
