Mamidi Siva Rama Krishna vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5463 AP

       HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: ANDHRA PRADESH

 MAIN CASE : CRIMINAL PETITION No.6421 of 2022

                           PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.                                                                         OFFICE
      DATE                             ORDER
No                                                                          NOTE.

1. 22.8.2022 NJS,J
                               Crl.P. No.6421 of 2022
                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the
             learned Standing Counsel for C.I.D., appearing for the
             respondent.

List the matter after four weeks for filing counter.

_________ NJS,J I.A. No.1 of 2022 Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia submits that registration of Crime and taking cognizance of the same by the learned Magistrate against the petitioners under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) is not sustainable in the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly once the petitioners have rendered legal opinion on the basis of the certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Pendurthy that the land which was mortgaged to the Bank is not Government assigned land. He submits that at the best, it may be the case on the petitioners' negligence and the provisions of Section 406 IPC would not attract, as there is no entrustment of property with the dominion over the same in terms of Section 409 IPC. He also places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gurukanwarpal Kirpal Singh vs. Surya Prakasam, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 519 and Central Bureau of Investigation, Hyderabad vs. K.Narayana Rao, Criminal Appeal No.1460 of 2012, dated 21.9.2012.

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent on the other hand opposing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia submits that though in the charge sheet it is inter alia stated that the petitioners/Accused Nos.6 and 7 are liable for punishment under Section 120B IPC, inadvertently the same was not mentioned in the charge sheet and as such charge sheet is filed that they are liable for the offence punishable under Section 406 IPC. While placing reliance on Section 216 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, learned Standing Counsel would submit that the Court is empowered to alter or add to any charge at any time before judgment is pronounced.

The matter requires consideration in the light of the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

Therefore, there shall be interim stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No.4697 of 2021 on the file of the Court of the Chief Metropoloitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, including the appearance, in so far as the petitioners/Accused Nos.6 and 7, for a period of six weeks.

_________ NJS,J vasu