Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
K.Veeraswami Reddy vs State Of Ap on 1 March, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.996 OF 2019
ORDER:
The complainant lodged a report before the police seeking to
investigate and take appropriate action on the petitioners/accused
Nos. 1 to 3, alleging that the petitioners have taken loans to a tune
of Rs.75,00,000/- from P.D.C.C Bank, Uppugundur branch, in
collusion with Sri K.Ankaiah, formally Tahsildar, Chinganjam, now
retired from service and Sri Gaddam Mariyadas, who worked as a
computer operator in the regime of Sri K.Ankaiah, the staff of
P.D.C.C Bank who were involved in sanctioning the loans to the
persons who are not entitled to get loans.
2. On the basis of this report, the police registered a crime vide
FIR No.1 of 2019 dated 06.01.2019 for the offenses punishable
under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C. against the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 and the same is assailed in the
present criminal petition, on the ground that the petitioners were
falsely implicated in the said crime, they have not committed any
said acts, much less as alleged by the 2nd respondent/de-facto
complainant. The petitioners are availed the loan from the Co-
Operative Central Bank, Ltd., at Ongole.
3. It is a settled law that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in myriad
pronouncement of judgments more particularly, in Neeharika
infrastructure private limited vs. State of Maharashtra and
others1 the Supreme Court has categorically held that the High
Court should refrain from passing the orders and quashing the
proceedings vested with the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C,
when the investigation is at a nascent stage. The High Court being
the highest Court of a State should normally refrain from giving
a premature decision in a case wherein the entire facts are
extremely incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not
been collected and produced before the Court and the issues
involved whether factual or legal are of great magnitude and cannot
be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material. In view
of the judgment of the Apex Court, this court is not inclined to
quash the proceedings, as the specific allegations of cognizable
offence were found against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 in
the FIR.
4. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to exercise the powers to
quash the FIR, when the investigation is at a nascent stage.
5. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. However, the
police are directed to follow the procedure contemplated as
(2021) 19 SCC 401
pronounced by the Apex Court. Therefore, the police are directed to
investigate the case and file a charge sheet, not to arrest the
petitioners.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this
Criminal Petition shall stand closed.
________________________________________
JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
Date: 01.03.2024
BSK
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHARA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.996 OF 2019
Date: 01-03-2024
BSK
