Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sobha Swathi Rani vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 14 November, 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No. Crl.P.No.11814 of 2025
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl. OFFICE
DATE ORDER
No. NOTE
01. 14.11.2025 Dr.VJP, J
I.A.No.2 of 2025
Heard Sri K.P.S.Sailesh Reddy, learned
counsel for the Petitioner / Accused No.4.
Learned counsel would submit that a case in
Crime No.47 of 2025 on the file of Koyyuru Police
Station, Alluri Sitharama Raju District for the
offences under Sections 308(4), 351(3) and 140(2)
read with 3(5) of BNS and Section 3(1)(f),
3(2)(V)(va) of SCs & STs (PoA) Act has been
registered against the Petitioner and others on the
ground that while the de facto complainant was
carrying out operations of laterite mining as per the
rules and regulations of the Government, Petitioner
herein along with other Accused threatened him
demanding to transfer his mining lease to them. It
is further alleged that they also kidnapped the De
facto complainant and his brother, switched off
their phones, forcibly took him to Bheemunipatnam
Joint Sub Registrar Office and obtained his
signature on an agreement stating that he had
received Rs.20.00 lakhs for the said mining lease.
Learned counsel would further submit that, prima
facie there are no ingredients to attract the
offences alleged against the Petitioner. Learned
counsel for the Petitioner would further submit that
the Petitioner/A.4 had previously worked as a
Chairperson of Girijana Corporation. It is further
submitted that, the Petitioner/A.4 lodged a
complaint dated 03.09.2025 before the National
Commission for Scheduled Tribes against the De
facto complainant alleging several irregularities in
the laterite mining lease in Bhamidika Village of
Anakapalli District, due to which, the mining
operations in that area were temporarily halted. As
such, having borne grudge against the Petitioner,
the present complaint has been lodged by the De
facto complainant with false allegations. It is further
submitted that the Petitioner belongs to the ST
community and hence, invocation of the provisions
of SCST (PoA) Act against the Petitioner is not
permissible under law.
Learned counsel would further submit that
there is an inordinate delay in lodging the present
complaint as the alleged incident said to have
taken place on 27.05.2024, whereas, the present
complaint was lodged on 01.11.2025. The present
complaint has been lodged with a political motive.
Learned counsel finally prays to stay all further
proceedings in this matter.
Sri M.Lakshminarayana, learned Public
Prosecutor takes notice on behalf of the State.
Learned Public Prosecutor would submit that, there
are specific allegations leveled against the
Petitioner/A.4 in the commission of the alleged
offences. It is further submitted that investigation is
at the nascent stage and the same may go on to
reveal the truth or otherwise of the said allegations.
In support of his contentions, learned Public
Prosecutor has placed reliance on the judgments of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Muskan vs. Ishaan
Khan (Santaniya) & Others1 and the High Court
of Delhi in Om Prakash Srivastav @ Babloo vs.
State2.
As seen from the material, it appears prima
facie that there is a delay in lodging the FIR and
that there is verifiable material to be disclosed
during investigation and that, this is not the stage
to decide the truth or otherwise of the said
allegations or culpability of the Petitioner in the
commission of the alleged offences, by going into
merits of the case.
Considering the submissions made, Police are
directed not to take any coercive steps against the
Petitioner/A.4 relating to Crime No.47 of 2025 on
the file of Koyyuru Police Station, Alluri Sitharama
Raju District, till the next date of hearing.
However, it does not preclude the Police to
proceed with the investigation and file a report.
1
2025 INSC 1287
2
2006 (92) DRJ 198
Petitioner shall appear before the Police as
and when directed by the Police and shall
cooperate with the investigation.
________
Dr.VJP, J
Crl.P.No.11814 of 2025
Meanwhile, learned counsel for the
Petitioner/A.4 is permitted to take out personal
notice to Respondent No.2 through Speed Post /
Courier and file proof of the same.
List the matter on 28.11.2025.
________ Dr.VJP, J Note: Issue C.C today B/o.
Dinesh