Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sri Ganisetti Venkata Satya Raghu Ram vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 12 December, 2025
Author: K.Suresh Reddy
Bench: K Suresh Reddy
1
APHC010633722017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3239]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5390/2017
Between:
1. SRI GANISETTI VENKATA SATYA RAGHU RAM, S/O. POTHU RAJU,,
AGED 56 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS, RAGHAVENDRA NILAYAM,
NO.21, SOUTH SIVANI KOVIL STREET, KODAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI,
TAMILNADU STATE.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD.
2. GANISETTI VENKATA RAJENDRA PRASAD, S/O. POTHU RAJU,
AGED 62 YEARS, OCC : BUSINESS, R/O. FLAT NO.405, PARK
RESIDENCY, SAJJAPURAM, TANUKU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
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 Courtto quash the proceedings in C.C.No.228/2015 on thee file of the 1st Junior Civil Judge - cum - 1st Addl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District are alleged to have committed offenses punishable under Sections 403, 420, 463, 467, 468, 474, 477 and 477-AA read with sections 34 and 1 120-B B of IPC against the Petitioner and grant.
2IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRLPMP 5388 OF 2017 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 to dispense with filing of the original certified copy of Complaint in C.C.No.228/2015 on the file of the 1st Junior Civil Judge - cum
- 1st Addl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District and pass.
IA NO: 2 OF 2017(CRLPMP 5389 OF 2017 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 to grant stay of all further proceedings C.C.No.228/2015 on the file of the 1st Junior Civil Judge - cum - 1st Addl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District are alleged to have committed offenses punishable under Sections 403, 420, 463, 467, 468, 474, 477 and 477-A read with sections 34 and 120-B of IPC including personal appearance pending disposal of the above Criminal Petiton and grant.
IA NO: 3 OF 2017(CRLPMP 8537 OF 2017 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 to vacate the order dated 10.07.2017 passed in Crl.P.MP.No.5389/2017 in Crl.P.No.5390/2017 in this Hon'ble Court in the interests of justice and fair adjudication of the matter IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 to extend the order dated 10-07-2017 in IA.No. 2 of 2017 (CrlP.MP.No. 5389 of 2017) in Crl.P.No. 5390 of 2017 till the disposal of the criminal petition in the interest of justice. IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 to grant stay of all further proceedings including the appearance of the petitioner in CC No. 288 of 2015 on the file of 1st Junior 3 Civil Judge-cum-1st Addl. Judl. First Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District, pending disposal of the Crl.P.No. 5390 of 2017 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 pleased to pass an order directing the 1st Additional Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District (Now Konaseema Ambedkar District) to set a date for the trail in C.0 No 228/2015 and go ahead with the same in accordance with the Judgment /direction of the Hon'ble Supreme court of India that was held on 15.10.20 in Miscellaneous Application No: 1577 OF 2020 in Criminal Appeal nos. 1375- 1376 of 2013 and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. I V N RAJU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PARTY IN PERSON
2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
3. RAMA MURTY P V S A CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5446/2017 Between:
1. MANGENA VARA LAKSHMI NARAYANA MANI, W/O. R.D.V.PRASADA RAO, AGED 67 YEARS, R/O. IRAGAVARAM VILLAGE, IRAGAVARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND
1. THE STATE OF A P, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAC.
2. GANISETTI VENKATA RAJENDRA PRASAD, S/O.POTHU RAJU, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS, R/O.FLAT NO.405, PARK RESIDENCY, SAJJAPURAM, TANUKU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
4
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 Courtto quash the proceedings in C.C.No.228/2015 on the file of the 1st Junior Civil Judge -cum- 1st Addl. Judicial 1st Class MagiStrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District are alleged to have committed offenses punishable under Sections 403, 420, 463, 467, 468, 474, 477 and 477-A read with sections 34 and 120-B of IPC against the Petitioner and grant IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRLPMP 5453 OF 2017 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 to dispense with filing of the original certified copy of Complaint in C.C.No.228/2015 on the file of the 1st Junior Civil Judge -cum- 1st Addl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2017(CRLPMP 5454 OF 2017 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 to grant stay of all further proceedings C.C.No.228/2015 on the file of the 1st Junior Civil Judge -cum- 1st Addl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District are alleged to have committed offenses punishable under Sections 403, 420, 463, 467, 468, 474, 477 and 477-A read with sections 34 and 120-B of IPC including personal appearance pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition and grant IA NO: 3 OF 2017(CRLPMP 8580 OF 2017 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 to vacate the order dated 10.07.2017 passed in Crl.P.MP.No. 5454/2017 in Crl.P.No. 5446/2017 in this Hon'ble court in the interest of justice and fair adjudication of the matter IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 to extend the order dated 10-07-2017 in IA.No.2 5 of 2017 (CrlP.MP.No. 5454 of 2017) in Crl.P.No. 5446 of 2017 till the disposal of the criminal petition in the interest of justice.
IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 to grant stay of all further proceedings including the appearance of the petitioner in CC No. 288 of 2015 on the file of 1st Junior Civil Judge-cum-1st Addl. Judl. First Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District, pending disposal of the Crl.P.No. 5446 of 2017 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 pleased to pass an order directing the 1st Additional Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District (Now Konaseema Ambedkar District) to set a date for the trail in C.0 No 228/2015 and go ahead with the same in accordance with the Judgment /direction of the Hon'ble Supreme court of India that was held on 15.10.20 in Miscellaneous Application No: 1577 OF 2020 in Criminal Appeal nos. 1375- 1376 of 2013 and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. I V N RAJU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PARTY IN PERSON
2. PARTY IN PERSON-09999/AP/9999/2017
3. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5447/2017 Between:
1. SMT. PURETI HANUMAVATHI, W/O. SURYA PRAKASA RAO, AGED 66 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O.KAKARAPARRU, PERAVALI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 6
1. THE STATE OF A P, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, HYDERABAD.
2. GANISETTI VENKATA RAJENDRA PRASAD, S/O.POTHU RAJU, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS, R/O.FLAT NO.405, PARK RESIDENCY, SAJJAPURAM, TANUKU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
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 Courtto quash the proceedings in C.C.No.228/2015 on the file of the 1st Junior Civil Judge -cum- 1st Addl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District are alleged to have committed offenses punishable under Sections 403, 420, 463, 467, 468, 474, 477 and 477-A read with sections 34 and 120-B of IPC against the Petitioner and grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRLPMP 5455 OF 2017 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 to dispense with filing of the original certified copy of Complaint in C.C.No.228/2015 on the file of the 1st Junior Civil Judge -cum- 1st Addl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2017(CRLPMP 5456 OF 2017 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 to grant stay of all further proceedings C.C. No. 228/2015 on the file of the 1st Junior Civil Judge -cum- 1st Addl. Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District are alleged to have committed offenses punishable under Sections 403, 420, 463, 467, 468, 474, 477 and 477-A read with sections 34 and 120-B of IPC including personal appearance pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition and grant IA NO: 3 OF 2017(CRLPMP 8576 OF 2017 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 to vacate the order dated 10.07.2017 passed in 7 Crl.P.MP.No. 5456/2017 in Crl.P.No.5447/2017 in this Hon'ble Court in the interests of justice and fair adjudication of the matter IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 to extend the order dated 10-07-2017 in IA.No. 2 of 2017 (CrlP.MP.No. 5456 of 2017) in Crl.P.No. 5447 of 2017 till the disposal of the criminal petition in the interest of justice.
IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 to grant stay of all further proceedings including the appearance of the petitioner in CC No. 288 of 2015 on the file of 1st Junior Civil Judge-cum-1st Addl. Judl. First Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District, pending disposal of the Crl.P.No. 5447 of 2017 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 pleased to pass an order directing the 1st Additional Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District (Now Konaseema Ambedkar District) to set a date for the trail in C.0 No 228/2015 and go ahead with the same in accordance with the Judgment /direction of the Honble Supreme court of India that was held on 15.10.20 in Miscellaneous Application No: 1577 OF 2020 in Criminal Appeal nos. 1375- 1376 of 2013 and pass such other Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. I V N RAJU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PARTY IN PERSON
2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
3. RAMA MURTY P V S A 8 The Court made the following COMMON ORDER:
As all the three Criminal Petitions are pertaining to the same Calendar Case i.e., C.C.No.228 of 2015 on the file of the Court of the learned I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District, they are being heard together and disposed of by way of this common order.
2. Criminal Petition No.5390 of 2017 was filed by A.2, Criminal Petition No.5446 of 2017 was filed by A.4, and Criminal Petition No.5447 of 2017 was filed by A.3 in the above Calendar Case. The offences alleged in the above C.C. are Sections 403, 420, 463, 467, 468, 474, 477 and 477-A r/w 34 and 120-B IPC.
3. The allegations made in the above C.C. are that the 2nd respondent filed a private complaint against these petitioners and A.1. The allegations in the private complaint are that A.1 and A.2 are the younger brothers of 2nd respondent / complainant. A.3 and A.4 are the elder sisters of the complainant. The complainant along with A.1 to A.4 and their father formed a Partnership Firm in the name and style of 'Prasad Rice Mill' situated in an extent of Ac.3.80 cents with huge machinery and godowns with built up area of about 30,000 sq. feet at G.Pedapudi, P.Gannavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. They entered into a Partnership Agreement dt. 04.10.1988 in the name of 'Prasad Rice Mill'. Initially, the complainant was the Managing Partner of the Firm. It is further alleged that the complainant fell sick with kidney problem during the year 1989 and during his absence, the accused were in-charge of the affairs of the Firm. Thereafter the management of the 9 Firm was entrusted to their father by way of Supplementary Partnership Deed on 05.01.1991. Though the father of the complainant and the accused were named as Managing Partners, A.1 and A.2 actively participated in managing the affairs of the Firm. Subsequently, certain disputes arose between the complainant on one hand and the accused on the other. Then, the complainant filed O.P.No.47 of 1994 before the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge, Razole seeking dissolution of the Partnership Firm. A temporary injunction order was passed in the said O.P. vide I.A.No.470 of 1994. Subsequently, the father of the complainant expired on 30.11.1998.
Subsequently, the O.P. was converted into O.S.No.40 of 2001 on the file of the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge, Razole. Thereafter, A.1 to A.4, having conspired together, forged and fabricated certain documents to show that the complainant had retired from the Firm on 31.03.1992 itself and created false records by falsifying the accounts. It is alleged that they fictitiously withdrew the amount invested by the complainant to a tune of Rs.12,00,000/- and used the same for their personal benefits. It is also alleged that even a single pie was not paid to the complainant. He further contends that the accused have fabricated several documents and created fictitious records. On the basis of the said allegations, present private complaint was filed.
4. Heard Sri I.V.N.Raju, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri G.V.Rajendra Prasad, Party-in-person / 2nd respondent / complainant. 10
5. Sri I.V.N.Raju, learned counsel for the petitioners, contends that the 2 nd respondent / complainant had already filed a civil suit vide O.S.No.40 of 2001 on the file of the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kothapeta, East Godavari District, seeking dissolution of the Partnership Firm. After an elaborate trial, the trial Court dismissed the suit vide judgment and decree dt. 26.07.2011. He submits that there is a specific finding in the judgment in O.S.No.40 of 2001 that the 2nd respondent / complainant was retired from Partnership Firm on 31.03.1992. As such, the allegations now made by the 2 nd respondent / complainant stand falsified by the finding of the trial Court in O.S.No.40 of 2001. As such, he requests this Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioners / A.2 to A.4 as they are nothing but the abuse of the process of law.
6. On the other hand, Sri G.V.Rajendra Prasad, Party-in-person / 2nd respondent / complainant, vehemently opposed the present petitions contending inter alia that A.1 had already filed Criminal Petition No.3103 of 2017 seeking the very same relief, which was dismissed by the combined High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh vide order dt. 20.04.2017, whereunder, in Para No.4, it was held as under:
"4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the order, dated 26.07.2011, passed in I.A.No.206 of 2009 in O.S.No.40 of 2001 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Kothapeta, East Godavari District. The said I.A. was filed by respondent No.2 - de facto complainant requesting to lodge a complaint against the respondents therein, who are the petitioner, 11 respondent No.3 and two others, and to set the criminal law into motion for giving false evidence and fabricating the documents. But, the civil Court did not incline to accede to such a request on the ground that the main Suit filed by respondent No.2 itself was dismissed with a finding that respondent No.2 retired from partnership by 31.03.1992 and therefore, the said petition was not maintainable. The learned counsel has also made various submissions, but the fact is that the said submissions relate to disputed questions of fact, touching the alleged forgery and fabrication of certain documents marked as Exs.B3, B6, B7, B22 and B23 to B42, and the same can only be resolved when the witnesses step into witness box and depose, where the petitioner would get an opportunity to cross-examine the de facto complainant as well as the witnesses cited by him. In an application under Section 482 of the Code, it is difficult to view the abuse of process of law, since, a roving enquiry cannot be held by giving a go-bye to the regular trial, to invite definite findings or observations on the disputed questions of fact. Therefore, the request in the present Criminal Petition cannot be acceded to."
He further contends that the petitioners in these Criminal Petitions have raised the very same contentions, which were already considered and negatived by the combined High Court in the aforesaid order in Criminal Petition No.3103 of 2017 dt. 20.04.2017.
7. The 2nd respondent / complainant further states that questioning the dismissal of the suit in O.S.No.40 of 2001, the 2nd respondent filed an appeal vide A.S.No.701 of 2011 before this Court which is pending adjudication. As such, the findings arrived at by the Court below in O.S.No.40 of 2001 are under challenge which is the subject matter of A.S.No.701 of 2011. 12
8. This Court perused the entire material on record.
9. As the issue is pending adjudication before this Court in A.S.No.701 of 2011, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits and demerits of the said allegations at this stage. Further, as the Criminal Petition filed by A.1 was already dismissed by the combined High Court at Hyderabad, this Court is not inclined to go into merits of the case at this stage. The allegations made against the petitioners involve disputed questions of fact, which are required to be adjudicated during the course of trial.
10. In view of the above circumstances, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners / A.2 to A.4 in C.C.No.228 of 2015 on the file of the Court of the learned I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kothapeta, East Godavari District. However, having regard to the fact that the petitioners are aged persons and are closely related to 2nd respondent / complainant, the personal appearance of the petitioners during the course of trial is hereby dispensed with, except on such dates as may be specifically required by the trial Court, including for examination under Sections 239 and 313 Cr.P.C.
. Accordingly, these Criminal Petitions are disposed of.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
__________________ K.SURESH REDDY, J 12.12.2025 MVA