Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/7569/2026 of Maddimsetti Karuna Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 31 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE 1 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7569/2026 Between: 1. MADDIMSETTI KARUNA KUMAR, S/O VEERA VENKATA SATYANARAYANA, MATTAVANI CHERUVU, YALAMANCHILI MANDAL, POST, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT
APHC010453472026
IN THE H
(
TUESDAY, T
THE HONOURABLE S
CRIMIN
Between:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. MADDIMSETTI KA SATYANARAYANA, MATTAVANI CHERU POST, WEST GODAV
1. THE STATE OF A PROSECUTOR, HIG AMARAVATI. THROU RURAL P.S. POLICE
2. CHELASANI RAMA ABOUT 71 YEARS, DENDULURU MANDA
Petition under Section circumstances stated in the High Court to Call for the Court of the learned Princ Class Magistrate, Eluru an concerned IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section circumstances stated in the HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE 1st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT RI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNC NAL PETITION NO: 7569/2026 RUNA KUMAR, S/O VEERA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, MPP UVU, YALAMANCHILI MANDAL, BURU VARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/A AND ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE GH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD UGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER STATION, WEST GODAVARI, MOHANA RAO, S/O DHARMA RA RTD EMPLOYEE, D.NO. 5-88, POT AL, ELURU DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLA 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying e Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal P records in C.C.No.271 of 2026 on the cipal Civil Judge (Junior Division) cum nd quash the same in so far as the P 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying e Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal P
CHEAM VENKATA SCHOOL, UGUPALLI ACCUSED E PUBLIC DESH AT , TANUKU AO, AGED THUNURU, INANT(S): g that in the Petition, the e file of the Judicial 1st Petitioner is g that in the Petition, the
MRK,J Crl.P.No.7569 of 2026
High Court may be pleased dispense with the filing of the certified copy in C.C No. 271 of 2026 on the file of the Court of the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) cum Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Eluru pending disposal of this Criminal Petition before this Hon’ble Court 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 stay all further proceedings including personal appearance of the Petitioner in C.C No. 271 of 2026 on the file of the Court of the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) cum Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Eluru pending disposal of this Criminal Petition before this Hon’ble Court Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. M SRI ATCHYUT Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
MRK,J Crl.P.No.7569 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 C.C.No.271 of 2026 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Eluru, wherein he was charged with the offences punishable under Sections 138(A) 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.1-State.
3. 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.
4. 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. So far as dispensing with the presence of the petitioner, before the trial Court, he has not opposed the same.
5. 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
MRK,J Crl.P.No.7569 of 2026
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.
6. 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.
7. 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 Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division)- cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Eluru, in C.C.No.271 of 2026 is hereby dispensed with, except on those dates when the learned trial Court feels that 1 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 594
MRK,J Crl.P.No.7569 of 2026
his presence is necessary. In the event of failure of the petitioner to appear, when the trial Court specifically directs, this Order shall stands automatically revoked, without recourse to this Court.
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.
9. 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: 01.09.2026 MDP