CRLP/8652/2026 of S Mohammad Rafi Vs S Nyamathulla on 28 September 2026

1. S MOHAMMAD RAFI FOREST OFFICE, TI MANDAL ANNAMAYY

1. S NYAMATHULLA, TIRUPATHI ROAD, ANNAMAYYA DISTRI

2. THE STATE OF A PROSECUTOR, HIGH AMARAVATI, GUNTU

Petition under Section circumstances stated in the High Court may be pleased which was taken on the File Magistrate of First Class: P U/s. 138 & 124 of the Ne justice IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section circumstances stated in the High Court may be pleas HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE 29th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT RI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNC NAL PETITION NO: 8652/2026 , S/O S.K. BASHA, R/O D.NO. 1-1353 RUPATHI ROAD, FILER VILLAGE, FIL YA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-517 ...PETITIONER/A AND S/O SULEMAN SHA, R/O D.NO PILER VILLAGE, PILER POST CT, ANDHRA PRADESH-517214. ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS H COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, NE UR DISTRICT-522239. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLA 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying e Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal P d to quash all the proceedings in S.T.C e of Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division) C Piler, Annamayya District, for the allege egotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in the 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying e Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal P sed to dispense with filing of certified

CHEAM 3/12, OPP. LER POST 7214. ACCUSED O. 2-147, MANDAL, S PUBLIC ELAPADU, INANT(S): g that in the Petition, the C.No.8/2026 Cum Judicial ed offences interest of g that in the Petition, the d copies of

MRK,J Crl.P.No.8652 of 2026

Proceedings in STC.No.8 of 2026 dated before the Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class: Piler, Annamayya District against the petitioner IA NO: 2 OF 2026 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in S.T.C. No. 8/2026 which was taken on the File of Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class: Piler, Annamayya District, for the alleged offences U/s. 138 &124 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, including the personal appearance of the Petitioner in the interest of justice, pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition, Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

1. CHALLAGALI GOPALARAJU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

2. MRK,J Crl.P.No.8652 of 2026

The Court made the following Order:

Instant Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023, has been filed on behalf of the petitioner herein (Accused), seeking to quash the proceedings in STC.No.8 of 2026 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Piler, wherein he was charged with the offences punishable under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.2-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein is aged about 50 years, is an employee of APSPDCL, and is presently working at Piler, Annamayya District.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing for some time, has confined his argument to the extent of dispensing with the presence of the petitioner (Accused) before the trial Court by submitting petitioner’s practical constraints in attending before the trial Court and states that petitioner shall not dispute his identity at a later stage of proceedings.

5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contended that specific accusations have been made as against the petitioner herein and truth or otherwise of the said accusations has to be decided during the course of trial, hence, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings at this stage.

MRK,J Crl.P.No.8652 of 2026

So far as dispensing with the presence of the petitioner, before the trial Court, he has not opposed the same.

6. Since there are specific accusations that have been made as against the petitioner herein, which are all disputed questions of fact, the same can be decided during the course of trial, and this Court, in a petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 corresponding to Section 482 Cr.P.C., would not be in a position to conduct roving enquiry into the disputed questions of fact and quash the proceedings at this stage.

7. In this context, it is apt to note the dictum held in State of Uttar Pradesh and Another Vs. Akhil Sharda and Others1, by the Apex Court in its vivid terms in the following way:

7. Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court by which the High Court has set aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it appears that the High Court has virtually conducted a mini trial, which as such is not permissible at this stage and while deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. As observed and held by this Court in a catena of decisions no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., jurisdiction and at the stage of deciding the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court cannot get into appreciation of evidence of the particular case being considered.

1 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 594

MRK,J Crl.P.No.8652 of 2026

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein. However, due to ground realities submitted by the counsel for the petitioner, presence of petitioner herein (Accused) before the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)- cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Piler, in STC.No.8 of 2026 is hereby dispensed with, except on those dates when the learned trial Court feels that his presence is necessary. In the event of failure of the petitioner to appear, when the trial Court specifically directs, this Order shall stand automatically revoked, without recourse to this Court.

9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

10. Needless to state that the petitioner is at liberty to raise all the grounds before the trial Court.

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J

Dated: 29.09.2026 MDP