Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Kanthi Rana Tata Ips vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 8 May, 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAF
THURSDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
CRL.P.NOS.4395, 3649, 3898 AND 3933 OF 2025
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4395 OF 2025
Between:
Vishal Gunni, S/o. D.Jaya Prakash, Aged about 41 years, Occ IPS Officer,
(under suspension) R/o. 44, 5th A Main Hebbal, Bangalore.
Petitioner/Accused A6
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Special Public Prosecutor Crime
Investigation Department, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi.
2. Ms.Kadambari Jetwani, D/o. Narendra Kumar, Aged about 37 years,
R/o. A-602, IDEAL Apartments, Gulmohar Road, Juhu, Mumbai,
Maharashtra.
Respondent/Complainant
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023(Section 482 of Cr.P.C),
praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed
in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash
the proceedings in Crime No.469/2024 on the file of the Ibrahimpatnam Police
Station, NTR District in so far as the petitioner/A6.
IA NO: 2 OF 2025
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023(Section 482 of Cr.P.C),
praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed
in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all
further proceedings in Crime No.469/2024 on the file of the Ibrahimpatnam
Police Station, NTR District, Pending disposal of CRLP 4395 of 2025, on the
file of the High Court.
2
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the
memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the
arguments of Sri O M R LAW FIRM, Advocate for the Petitioner and of
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent, the Court made the following
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3649 OF 2025
Between:
Kanthi Rana Tata IPS, S/o. Tata Murali Shankar, aged about 48 years R/o.
Flat-A 501, B and M Legacy Apartment Pinnamaneni vari Street,
Mogalrajpuram Vijayawada.
Petitioner/Accused-3
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Spl. Public
Prosecutor Crime Investigation Department at High Court of Andhra
Pradesh Through Station House Officer Ibrahimpatnam Police Station
2. Ms. Kadambari Jethwani, D/o. Narendra Kumar, aged about 37 years
R/o. A-602, Ideal Apartments, Gulmohar Road Juhu, Mumbai,
Maharashtra.
Respondent/Complainant
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023(Section 482 of Cr.P.C),
praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed
in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash
the FIR in Crime No. 469/2024, of Ibrahimpatnam Police Station, Vijayawada,
NTR District.
lA NO: 2 OF 2025
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023(Section 482 of Cr.P.C),
praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed
in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant
order of interim-stay of all further proceedings in Crime No. 469/2024 on the
3
file of Ibrahimpatnam Police Station, NTR District, Pending disposal of GRIP
3649 of 2025, on the file of the High Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the
memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the
arguments of Sri ANIL KUMAR DASARI, Advocate for the Petitioner and of
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent, the Court made the follo\A/ing
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3898 OF 2025
Between:
K Hanumantha Rao, S/o Srinivasa Rao, Aged 57 years. Employee, R/o. Flat
No.5, Fourth Floor, Anjaneya Towers, 0pp. IMA Building, Eluru Road,
Governorpet, Vijayawada, N.T.R. District.
Petitioner/Accused No.4
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Spl. Public Prosecutor Crime
Investigation Department at High Court of Andhra Pradesh Through
Station House Officer Ibrahimpatnam Police Station.
2. Ms. Kadambari Jethwani, D/b Narendra Kumar, Aged about 37 years,
R/o A-602, Ideal Apartments, Gulmoher Road, Juhu, Mumbai,
Maharastra.
Respondent/Respondents
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023(Section 482 of Cr.P.C),
praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed
in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for all
the records leading to the registration of the Crime No. 469 of 2024 dated 13-
09-2024 of ibrahimpatnam Police Station, N.T.R. District (Which is presently
being investigated by the CID, A.P), and the investigation therein, and to
declare the same as illegal, unlawful and abuse of process of law, and to
quash the impugned investigation as against the Petitioner/Accus ed No.4
herein is concerned.
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023(Section 482 of Cr.P.C),
praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed
in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all
further proceedings in Crime No. 469/2024 dated 13-09-2024 of
Ibrahimpatnam Police Station, N.T.R District (Which is presently being
investigated by the CID, A.P), pending disposal of the main Criminal Petition
and pass. Pending disposal of CRLP 3898 of 2025, on the file of the High
Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the
memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the
arguments of Sri NARASIMHA RAO GUDISEVA, Advocate for the Petitioner
and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent, the Court made the following
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3933 OF 2025
Between:
M. Satyanarayana, S/o. Prakash Rao Aged about 48 years, Occ. Inspector of
Police (Presently under suspension) R/o. Lotus Landmark, Ayodhya Nagar,
Vijayawada, NTR District.
Petitioner/Accused-5
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Spl. Public Prosecutor Crime
Investigation Department at High Court of Andhra Pradesh Through
Station House Officer Ibrahimpatnam Police Station
2. Ms. Kadambari Jethwani, D/o. Narendra Kumar, aged about 37 years
R/o. A-602, Ideal Apartments, Gulmohar Road Juhu, Mumbai,
Maharashtra.
Respondents/Complainants
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023(Section 482 of Cr.P.C),
praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed
in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash
the FIR in Crime No. 469/2024, dated 13-09-2024, of Ibrahimpatnam Police
Station, Vijayawada, NTR District,(which is presently investigated by C.I.D.
A.P.) thereby declare the same as illegal, unlawful and abuse of process of
law against the Petitioner/A-5
lA NO: 2 OF 2025
Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023(Section 482 of Cr.P.C),
praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed
in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant
order of interim-stay of all further proceedings in Crime No. 469/2024 on the
file of Ibrahimpatnam Police Station, NTR District, Pending disposal of CRLP
3933 of 2025, on the file of the High Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the
memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the
arguments of Sri ANIL KUMAR DASARI, Advocate for the Petitioner and of
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent, the Court made the following
ORDER
"On 09.04.2025, this Court passed the following order "Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for Accused No. 4 in CrI.P. No. 3898 of 2025 and Sri Vinod Kumar Desh Pande, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for Accused No. 5 in CrI.P. No. 3933 of 2025.
It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is implicated in Crime No. 469 of 2024 for the alleged offences under Sections 192, 211, 218, 220, 354(D), 467, 420, 469, 471 r/w 120(b) of the IPC. The crime was registered on 13.09.2024.
it is submitted that the petitioners in both the quash petitions are working as police officers in the State police. The petitioner in CrI.P. No. 3933 of 2025 is the investigating officer in Crime No. 90 of 2024, which has been registered against the 2"^ respondent herein. The petitioner in CrI.P. No. 3898 of 2025 is arraigned as Accused No. 4, and it is submitted that he was not discharging his duty as a police officer in the 1^^ respondent's establishment at the time of the registration of Crime No. 90 of 2024.
It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel that on 29.08.2024, a memo was issued by the Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada, to the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada, for enquiring into the allegations of the registration of a false case under Crime No. 90 of 2024. On 10.09.2024, the Assistant Commissioner of Police submitted a report to the Commissioner. It is also submitted that the statement of the 2 nd respondent was recorded on 31.08.2024, 05.09.2024, and 13.09.2024. Thereafter, FIR No. 469 of 2024 was registered against the petitioner and others.
It is submitted that the very genesis of the registration of Crime No. 469 of 2024 is not legal and valid in the eyes of the law. It is also submitted that without Crime No. 90 of 2024 being decided on merits after a full-fledged trial, an allegation regarding the registration of a false crime and the subsequent registration of a fresh crime against the police officers and the legal advisor must be set aside. It is further submitted that the continuation of an investigation in a case that has no foundation should be addressed by this Court. It is also submitted that while registering Crime No. 469 of 2024, the police officer did not conduct any preliminary investigation before registering the case. The enquiry report submitted by the Assistant Commissioner of Police cannot be considered as the preliminary investigation, which is essentially required to be conducted by the investigating officer. The learned Senior Counsel appearing in CrI.P. No. 3933 of 2025 submits that the registration of Crime No. 469 of 2024 is in direct violation of the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Lalitha Kumari vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and Others.
It is submitted that the petitioner, being the investigating officer, has followed the procedure as contemplated under Cr.P.C./BNSS for the purpose of investigation. It is also submitted that the petitioner has obtained a search warrant from the competent court and also required a passport from the Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada. It is further submitted that nd the 2 respondent did not file any complaint, raise any objection, or submit any memo to the transit Magistrate when the transit warrant was sought by the investigating officer. The 2"^ respondent also had ample opportunity before the learned Magistrate when the investigating officer filed an application seeking police custody. The petitioner did not raise any grounds or allegations against the petitioner or others in the bail application or in any other proceedings before this Court. As such, there is an abnormal delay of seven months in registering the F.I.R.
It is submitted by both the learned Senior Counsels appearing in the above CrI.Ps that the continuation of the investigation or crime against the petitioner is a stigma on his career, and as such, they insist for an interim direction for a stay of all further proceedings in the case. The learned Senior Counsel also relies 8 on Sections 195 and 211 of the Cr.F.C. and submits that the registration of Crime No. 469 of 2024 is in contravention of both provisions of law. The learned Advocate General appearing for the State submits that the police have registered a crime after the receipt of the complaint, and the offences punishable under various provisions of law, as mentioned above, would entitle the police to initiate an investigation. It is further submitted that Section 354(D) cannot be read into Sections 211 and 195 of the Cr.P.C.
The learned Senior Counsel places reliance on the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of Arockiasamy vs. The State of Tamil Nadu and Another in SLP (CrI.) No. 5805 of 2023 and State, CBI vs. Sashi Balasubramanian and another((2006) 13 SCC
252) . The allegations are stated to be investigated, and as such, it is submitted that the mere pendency of the FIR against the petitioner cannot be considered a stigma. It is also submitted that the learned Advocate General intends to submit all the material which would enable this Court to pass a reasonable order on merits at the final hearing.
It is also submitted by the learned Advocate General that the petitioner had obtained bail before arrest and that the investigating officer in Crime No. 469 of 2024 would not be summoning the petitioner at least till the next date of hearing and that the charge sheet would also not be filed by them. It is submitted that in a similar matter, CrI.P.No. 3649 of 2025 filed by Accused No. 3, an undertaking was given to that effect that the petitioner would not be troubled till the next date of hearing, and he requests time to place the counter on record on behalf of the State.
9Considering the submissions, this Court is of the considered view that the undertaking given by the learned Advocate General would suffice for now.
Post the matter on 28.04.2025.
In the meanwhile, the learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice to the 2nd respondent through registered post with acknowledgment due and file proof of service in the Registry".
Thereafter time was granted on 28.04.2025, 01.05.2025 and today further time is sought for filing counter and for hearing by the learned Advocate General.
The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners objected for grant of further adjournment and insist for hearing.
The learned Advocate General reiterates that the petitioners shall not be called to the police station, that they shall not be troubled, and that the charge sheet also would not be filed. Further time Is sought for filing counters and hearing.
nd Notice on the 2 respondent Is served and proof of service is filed. However, there is no representation for the 2 nd respondent.
Considering the submissions of learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners that the registration of Crime No.469 of 2024 is hit by bar under Section 195 of Cr.P.C., The Hon'ble Supreme Court had laid down principles relating to prosecutions under Section 195 Cr.P.C., and passed detailed principles at para 21 of the judgment in the matter of M.R.Ajayan Vs. State of Kerala and others(2024 SCC Online SC 3373) . Considering the submission that the very registration of crime No.469 of 2024 is under challenge on the ground that the procedure contemplated under Section 195 Cr.P.C. was not followed, this matter would require consideration, as such there shall be stay of all further proceedings in so far as the petitioner is concerned in Crime No.469 of 2024 on the file of Ibrahimpatnam Police Station, Vijayawada, NTR district.
10Post on 30.06.2025, for filing of counter(s) and hearing.
Srf'-
.k£G\Si Ar*' .o //TRUE COPY// 1 To,
1. The SHO., Ibrahimpatnam Police Station, N.T.R. District.
2. Ms.Kadambari Jetwani, D/o. Narendra Kumar, Aged about 37 years R/o. A-602, IDEAL Apartments, Gulmohar Road, Juhu, Mumbai Maharashtra.
3. One CC to SRI. OMR LAW FIRM Advocate [OPUC]
4. One CC to SRI. NARASIMHA RAO GUD IS EVA Advocate [OPUC]
5. One CC to SRI. ANIL KUMAR DASARI Advocate [OPUC]
6. Two CCs to the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of A.P [OPUC]
7. One spare copy psk 11 HIGH COURT HN,J DATED:08/05/2025 POST ON 30.06.2025 ORDER CRL.P.NOS.4395, 3649, 3898 AND 3933 OF 2025 DIRECTION