The High Court · 2025

1. Katta Kamalakar, S/o. Katta Satyanarayna Age 3i3 yrs, Occ. Private Employee, Resident of H.No. 27-6-117, Srinagar, Galr,rraka Visakhapatnam- 26 .. Petitio rer/Respondent

2. The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Judicature of Telangana, tlyderabad. .. Responde n t'Petitir: ner Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that tr the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,tne High Court may be pleased TO VACATE:he stay order order in lA.No. 011202ll ln Crl P No 2312021 on the file of this Hon'ble Court against Crime No. 2312021 dated 24.02 2021 Thrs Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Crrminal Petition and upon hearing the argun ents of Sri T. RAN/A CHANDRA IMURTHY ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri E (lanesh. Asst. Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri Barkha Bhalla. Advocate for the Respondent No.2 CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1137 OF 2021 Between: 1 Katta Ratna Kumari, Wo. Gangadhara Rao, Age 55 yrs. i)cc House wife, 2 Kalla Satyanarayna, S/o. K.Subramanyam, Age 6ei yrs, Occ Private E m ployee,

3. Katta Prasad Sio. Katta Satyanarayna, Age 36 yrs, C)cc Private Employee, All are Resident of H.No. 27-6-117, Srinagar, Gajuwaka, \,/isakhapatnam-26 ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos. 3 to 5 AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, Frgh Court of Judicature of Telangana, Hyderabad.

2. Palisetty Swathi, Wo.Naresh K, Occ: Pvt. Employee age about 34 yrs, R/o. Plot No.'1 39, Near Padma Pani Acharya Communitv -lall Hastinapuram, Sagar Road, R.R.Dist500079. ...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS ';4w Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P .C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for records in Crime.No 23 of 2021 on the flle of the L.B Nagar Police Station, Rachakonda, K.V R.R Dist registered for the Offences under Sections 42O, 406, 323, 506 r/w.34 lPC. and quash the same in so far as the petitioners. l.A. NO: 2OF 2021 Between: Palisetty Swathi, Wo.Naresh K, Occ. Pvt. Employee age about 34 yrs, R/o. PIot No.139, Near Padma Pani Acharya Communrty Hall, Hastinapuram, Sagar Road, R.R.Dist-500079 .. Respondent / Petitioner And

1. Katta Ratna Kumari, Wo. Gangadhara Rao, Age 55 yrs, Occ House wife, 2. Katla Satyanarayna, S/o. K.Subramanyam, Age 66 yrs, Occ Private Em ployee,

3. Katta Prasad, S/o. Katta Satyanarayna, Age 36 yrs, Occ Private Employee AII are Resident of H.No. 27-6-117 , Srinagar. Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-26

4. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad Petitioners / Respondent Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to vacate the stay granted in Crl.P.No 1137 of 2021 on the file of Hon'ble Court, dated 241021021 . l.A. NO: 1OF 2022 Between: The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad ..Petitioner / Respondent And

1. Katta Ratna Kumari, Wo. Gangadhara Rao, Age 55 yrs, Occ House wife, 2. Katta Satyanarayna, S/o. K.Subramanyam, Age 66 yrs, Occ Private Em ployee,

3. Katta Prasad, S/o. Katta Satyanarayna, Age 36 yrs, Occ Private Employee, All are Resident of H.No. 27-6-117, Srinagar, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam-26 Respondents/ Accused

4. Palisetty Swathi. W/o.Naresh K, Occ. Pvt. Employee age about 34 yrs, R/o Plot No.139, Near Padma Panr Acharya Community Hall. Hastinapuram, ( R-4 is not necessary party) Sagar Road R.R Dist-500079. .. RespondenV rlomplainant Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition. the High Court may be pleased to vacate the stay in Cr1.P.No.113712021 on the file of the Hon'ble coutl daled 24 022421 l.A. NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P C praytng thal in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, lhe High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings duding arrest of the petitroners in Crime No.23 of 20?-'t on the file of the L.B Nagar Polrce Station. Rachakonda, K.VR.R Dist registerec for the Offences under Sections 42A 406,323, 506 r/w 34 IPC pending disposal of the present Criminal Petition. This Petrtion coming on for hearing, upon perusing the I\,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argunents of Sri T. RAI\/A CHANDRA IVURTHY, Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri E. Ganesh, Asst. Public Prosecutor on cehalf of the Respondent No.1 and cf Sri Barkha Bhalla Advocate for the Respondent No.2 The Court made the following COMMON ORDER: -w,12' _.<.,/ THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E,,V. VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.1122 and 1137 of 2O2I COMMON ORDER: Criminal petition No.1 122 of 2022 rs filccl bv Accused No. I and u.hereas Criminal petition No. 1 137 ol 2O2 I is filed by Accused Nos.3 to 5 under Section -182 ol Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') to quzrsh the prcceedings against tl-rem in Cr. No.23 of 2O2l of L.t3.Nagar PoIce Station.

2. Since the subject matter involved in both these crrminal petitions is one and the salnc and as thc petitioners in these criminal petitions are nolle otller than the accused in the very same crime, this Courl is inclir-rcd to dispose of both these criminal petitions by u':ri' of this common order.

3. Heard Sri T. Ramachandra Murthy, learued counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel representing unofficial respondent and Mr.E.Ganesh, learned Assistarrt Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State ) ttt..t t t.t. t'\o\ t t)) ,t tll: ol2t):t -

4. The petitionel-s are accused Nos. I an<l ll to.5 in Cr No. 23 or' :102 I on the file of L.B.Nagar Police Station r-egistc'recl lbr tlrc offcnccs under Scctions -lll0. 406. 323 irnd 506 rcir(l \\'ith Scctrorr 34 of the lndian F'cn:rl Code (for s['rort 'lPC )

5. The briei facts ol the case are that on C5.O 1.2021 at about 3.215 PM thc de facto complainant tv name Smt Su'alhi, W/o K. Narcsh, D/o. Mohar.r Rao, R7o. Sagar Ring Road, L.B Nagerr lodged a complaint, urhercrn it is stated 11-rat I(attiL liarnaial<ar .rnd his family mernl:ers namely I(atta Kanralakirr, S/o. I(atta Satynarayana, 2) Smt. I{atta Sandh_t a, \,\/r'o. I(atta Kamalal<ar, 3) Katta Ratnal<umari, W/o. l(altrr SatS'anarayana, 4) Katta Satyanarayana, f lo I{atta l(am all.:trr and 5) I(atta Prasad, b/o. KzLtta Kamalkar have c:ollectc<l a sum of Rs.25,00,O00/- from 1,jr under the guise of purr:hasing a flat in her name bu,- surprisir-rgly ther. har.e acquired the property for themseLves s,ith her rnone,\' bv lhlcatening her that they rvould cornmit suicide and rnanl-randling her and her husband zrpart from w ) Llt_i f Rl P \,,r,: j ,t / r-,,/ ),'i t1-rrcatening her u'ith dire consequences and accordinglv pral.ecl to tal(e necessary action

6. Based upon the erborre said complair-rt, a c2lse ltl Crirne No.23 l2O2I for the offence under Sections -'120, 406, 323 and 506 read u,ith Section 34 of the lnclian Penal Code. Aggrieved bv the registration of the said critne, thesc Criminal Petitions have been filed by petitioners / accused Nos. 1 and 3 to 5

7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners rvoulcl submit that without conducting any preliminarr enqurry on the averments of the complaint made b,r, the cle- facto complainant and without offering any opportunit,r' to the petitioners, the case has been registered agarnst the petitioners. He further submitted that on mere allegatlon tl.rat de-facto complainant has paid Rs.25,OO,0O0 l- from 2010 to 2015, no substantiating evidence has been filed He further submitted that the de-facto complainant IS prosecuting Accused No.1 under the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act for the last three r.ears and having filed a case against accused No.l for the offencc -l urlclcr Scction 1 38 ol Negotiablc Instrumen ls, Act, the cle- I-acto conrplirrnant has l-ilcd thc present cor.upLrirrt onlv to harass ai:cLrse cl No.I and hi-s lermily mcmbe rs i.e. acclrsed Nos.2 to .r. Ti-rc leerrned cotrnsel further r onlcncled that t he proc(ie(lrr)gs Lln(lcr the provisions of Negotiable Instrumcnts Act ancl thc proccedings undcr tl'rc provistons of IncUan Penal Codc for- lhe s)ame cause ol' acl.ion cannot go togcl hcr and thercb,r sccks to allo'q, tl'ris Criminal [)etition stating t1'rat thc rr-rgrt:dients of Sections 42O,406, 323 ancl 506 rcad u.ith Sec:Lion 34 of the Indian Penal Code clocs not .rttr, rct

8. Or-r thc olhcr hand. the learned Ass;ir;tant Public Prosecutor t ould submit that this Court harl directed the r-espolldcnts/ l)olice to conduct investigation and on I)rotccting tl'rc intcrest of the petitioner from rrrrest and the I)etltroncr \\ AS assisting lhe respond er rt / police for concluding tl:e investigation in accordance u'ith la,,r, and to file appropria,c report

9. There is no appearancc on behalf of :he unofficial re sponde r-r t , ( t 5 l N. I' No! I 1)),1 I 1t' ol )n: t I 0. These criminal petitions have been taken up for hearing and disposing of the same with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Governmcnt Pleader.

11. Considering thc nature of allegations levelled against the petitioncrs and since the present crime registered against the petitioners is under investigation, stay of all further proceedings granted by this Court on 24.O2.2O21, i,as vacatcd by this Court on 2a.O3.2025 and directed the respondent/ Police not to arrest the petitloners so as to protect the interest of the petitioners. As the crime, which is of the year 2021, is under invesligation, this Court intends to dispose of these criminal petitions directing the respondent/ police to complete the investigation strictly in accordance with the Iaw by following the guidelines issued by the Honourablc Supreme Court in Arnesh Kutnar v. State of Biharl and any deviation in this regard will be vier.r,ed se riously. The petitioners are also directed to cooperate and coordinate with the investigating agency in ' (201.1) 8 scc 271 w' \"'r- 6 )l i ';.'il':d l''t I i ll.; ,'t)tD1 concluding th(' investillation. [n the mcanr,l4ti]e, as sought by the leanrcd counscl lirr the pctitioners, l lrc peritioners arre grantcd libcrS, to filc approprierte petiti( ns including discharge' pr.titions bcforc Lhe learned trial Oor,rrt and upon filing suc h pctitions, tl't: trial Court shall <lispose of thc said petir:ions on me rits and pass appropri:rto orders zrs expeditior-rsl1' as possibie prelerably q'ithin tn-ee rronths from the rlatc o[ rcceipt ol a copy of this order.

13. With thi: above r>bsen'ation, thcse petitions are disposed o1' Misccllaneous petitions, pending i[ anr.. shall stand closed. SD/-M.NAGAMANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G ,TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To

1. The ll Metropolitan lvlagistrate at L.B.Nagar, Cyberabad. Ranga Reddy District

2. The Station House Officer, L.B.Nagar Police Station, Hyderabad. 3. Two CCs to Pub ic Prosecutor, High Court for the State o'Telangana at Hyderabad (OU.l'.1

4. One CC to SRI T RAMA CHANDRA IVURTHY, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sn Barkha Bhalla, Advocate (OPUC) 6 Two CD Copies n\ Ulr kuli PSL HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 COMMON ORDER CRLP.Nos.'1122 and 1137 ot 2021 -,rt+--- _.a;, irtt' .il*, '\ '(, t o4l,lou ?ffr o,: >].o ^ ,. .- .l \i DISPOSING OF THE BOTH CRL.PETITIONS e +