P. Satish Chandra Chowdary, vs Pusaala Mahitha
2022 Latest Caselaw 1327 AP

         HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

                      MAIN CASE No.: Crl.P. No.1799 of 2022

                                   PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.                                                                                Office
        DATE                                  ORDER
No                                                                                 Note
1.    15.03.2022   CMR, J

                                         I.A.No.1 of 2022

                          Dispensed with for the present.


                                                                     ________
                                                                      CMR, J

                                      Crl.P. No.1799 of 2022

                          Learned Additional Public Prosecutor takes notice
                   for the 1st respondent/State and requests time to obtain

instructions.

Issue notice to the 2nd respondent.

Post after four (04) weeks.

________ CMR, J

I.A.No.2 of 2022

The petitioner are A-1 to A-4 in C.C.No.554 of 2019 on the file of Spl. Judicial First Class Magistrate for Trial of cases under AP Prohibition & Excise -cum- III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Anantapuram.

The petitioners were prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "I.P.C.") and under Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (for short "DP Act") in the said case as per the charge sheet laid by Ananthapuram IV Town Police Station.

The petitioners sought to assail the validity of the criminal proceedings which are initiated against them on the ground that the de facto complainant already lodged a similar report in Hennur Police Station of Bangaluru City of Karnataka State with similar allegations and the police have filed charge sheet in the said case and the petitioners were prosecuted for the similar offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 354, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of DP Act in the Court of XI A.C.M.M., Bangaluru City and they were acquitted in the said case as per the judgment dated 06.04.2016 and again on the basis of the same allegations the present report was lodged before the police and charge sheet is filed and the petitioners are again being prosecuted for the similar offences. Therefore, it is contended that it is a case of double jeopardy and the present prosecution is hit by Section 300 of Cr.P.C.

A perusal of certified copy of the judgment dated 06.04.2016 in C.C.No.51055 of 2016 on the file of XI A.C.M.M., Bengaluru City prima facie shows that the petitioners were already prosecuted for the said offences on the basis of similar allegations and they were acquitted of the said case. Again with the same allegations they are being prosecuted in the Court of Anantapuram in C.C.No.554 of 2019. Therefore, there is considerable force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that this case is hit by Section 300 of Cr.P.C on the principle of autrefois acquit. So the petitioners could make out a strong prima facie case warranting interference of this Court to examine in the main criminal petition whether launching of said criminal proceedings against the petitioners amounts to abuse of process of Court or not.

Therefore, in the said facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be interim stay of further proceedings in C.C.No.554 of 2019 on the file of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Anantapuram, till the next date of hearing.

_______ CMR, J KA