Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/4424/2025 of Rajesh Kumar Singh, Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 10 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos: 1414, 815, 2332, 2333, 2334, 4424, 4435, 9122 and 9812 of 2025
APHC010065172025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos: 1414, 815, 2332, 2333, 2334, 4424, 4435, 9122
and 9812 of 2025
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1414/2025:
Between:
1. PICHIGUNTIA MAHESWAR,, S/O.LAKSHMANNA, ROYAL CLUB
MEMBER, SOUTH INDIA HEAD, SHREYA GROUP OF COMPANIES, R/O.H.NO.1-99, THADAKANAPALLI VILLAGE, KALLUR MANDAL, KRUNOOL DISTRICT.
AND
Between:
1. SMT SANGEETA RAI, W/O SHREE. HEMANTH KUMAR RAI R/O
PLOT NO. A85, SOUTH CITY. A BLOCK, LUCKNOW, UTTAR
PRADESH - 2226025 .
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
AMARAVATI.
1. SINGAMSETTY V.M. SANKAR
Between:
1. DOKKARI TATAYYA, S/O.KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED 52 YEARS.
R/O.SUVAMAPURAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
ANDHRA PRADESH.
Between:
1. VISHAL SAROJ, S/O.CHHOTE LAL SAROJ, AGED 28 YEARS, BORD
MEMBER DIRECTOR MANAGER 62/21/B, BHOLA KA PURA
DHOOMANGANI,ALLAHABAD, UTTAR PRADESH
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
ANDHRA PRADESH.
Between:
1. GANTA
NANAJEE,
S/O.SURYARAO,
AGED
YEARS,
TAMMAIAHPETA, NAKKAPALLI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
ANDHRA PRADESH.
Between:
1. RAJESH KUMAR SINGH,, S/O. BASANTH SINGH, AGED 46 YEARS, R/O.A-32,LUCKNOW
TO
KANPUR
RAOD,NAYA
BASTI,NEAR
HOUSEING SOCITY SROJINI NAGAR,, ,LUCKNOW, UTTAR
PRADESH.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , Rep. By its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Amaravathi, Through Sub-Inspector of Police, Kurnool ill Town Police Station.
Between:
1. SHALINI KASHYAP, S/O.RAJU KASHYAP, AGED 29 YEARS, R/O.HOUSE
NO.3/354,VISHWAS
KHAND-
3,GOMTHINAGAR,LUCKNOW UTTAR PRADESH.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9122/2025
Between:
1. HEMAT KUMAR RAI, S/O KRISHNA KUMAR RAI, AGED ABOUT 48
YEARS, R/O P.NO.A 85, SOUTH CITY, A-BLOCK, RAEBARELI ROAD, LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR,
HIGH
COURT
OF
ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT
AMARAVATI, THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KURNOOL III
TOWN POLICE STATION, KURNOOL DISTRICT.
ANDHRA PRADESH. RESPONDENT NO.2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER
THE COURT ORDER DATED 11.09.2025 IN I.A.NO.1 OF 2025 IN
CRL.P.NO.9122 OF 2025.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
3. SPL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR CID
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9122/2025:
Between:
1. HEMAT KUMAR RAI, S/O KRISHNA KUMAR RAI, AGED ABOUT 48
YEARS, R/O P.NO.A 85, SOUTH CITY, A-BLOCK, RAEBARELI ROAD, LUCKNOW, UTTAR PRADESH.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR,
HIGH
COURT
OF
ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT
AMARAVATI, THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KURNOOL III
TOWN POLICE STATION, KURNOOL DISTRICT.
ANDHRA PRADESH. RESPONDENT NO.2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER
THE COURT ORDER DATED 11.09.2025 IN I.A.NO.1 OF 2025 IN
CRL.P.NO.9122 OF 2025.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
3. SPL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR CID
Between:
1. GUDEM SRINIVASULU, S/O G.CHINNA GIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT
40YRS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O H.NO.3-62, VAMASAMUDRAMU, H/O
KALLUR MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.
2. K.DAMODARA REDDY,, S/O K.RAMIREDDY, AGED ABOUT 49YRS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O H.NO.2-165, TADAKNAPALLI VILLAGE, KALLUR MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Through Station House Officer, III
Town Police Station, Kurnool,
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
1. SUBRAMANYAM DARABOINA
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos: 1414, 815, 2332, 2333, 2334, 4424, 4435, 9122
and 9812 of 2025
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.
COMMON ORDER :
These Criminal Petitions have been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNSS‟) by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 18 and 23 for granting of pre- arrest bail in connection with in Crime No. 352 of 2024 on the file of Kurnool III Town Police Station, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 21(1), 21(2), 21(3), 22 and 23 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019, Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 and Sections 318(4), 316(4), 335 read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”).
2. Since the subject matter of these Criminal Petitions is one and the same, at the request of the learned counsel on both sides, these matters are heard together and the following common order has been passed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the defacto complainant and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for CID representing on behalf of the State. Perused the record.
4. The case of the prosecution in brief is that this is a case of cheating, criminal breach of trust, followed by forgery and other offences under the provisions of APPDFE Act, 1999 and BUDS Act, 2019. The offence occurred prior to 22.11.2024 at Shreya Group of Companies, located at Birla
Compound, Kurnool Town and was reported on 22.11.2024. In this case, A5, A6 and A8 approached the complainant and persuaded him to invest a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- in A1 company, promising that he would receive a return of Rs.50,000/- per month for 18 months. Believing their deceitful words, the complainant invested the said amount in cash. The accused then executed an agreement, stating that if A1 company failed to pay the agreed returns, they would take personal responsibility. Accordingly, the complainant initially received the returns as promised. Encouraged by this, the complainant and his wife subsequently deposited a total amount of Rs.4,84,50,000/- on various dates. The A2, A3 and A4 with dishonest intention, in connivance with other accused cheated innocent members of the public by offering them false promises.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that initially the defacto complainant is also one of the Director and Partner of the company. A2 being one of the Directors issued legal notice to the defacto complainant on 03.10.2024. The defacto complainant issued reply seeking time. Arbitration proceedings are initiated at Lucknow. The petitioners are also victims in the hands of the defacto complainant. The defacto complainant has taken responsibility of the Andhra area on behalf of the company to collect deposits. Except the defacto complainant, no other victims are there in this case. A crime has been registered against the defacto complainant on 18.10.2024 at Lucknow and notice under Section 41(a) has been issued to the defacto complainant. As a counter attack, this case has been lodged against the company on 22.11.2024.
6. Learned counsel for the defacto complainant would submit that the company invited deposits from the public and initially they have obliged with the conditions of the deposits. Believing them, people invested amount from time to time. Learned counsel for the defacto complainant would further submit that the defacto complainant as the incharge of the Andhra area, he has personally cleared the amounts due to the innocent public.
7. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for CID would submit that 32 witnesses are examined in this matter so far. The investigating agency got seized the accounts of the company, wherein no funds are available and still they are issuing cheques. He would further submit that accused No.4 is the minor daughter of the accused No.2. Accused No.3 is the wife of the accused No.2. Accused No.2 is the Director of the Accused No.1 company. Accused Nos. 7, 18, 9, 14 and 23 are Board members and Directors of Accused No.1 company. Accused No.8 is the Royal Club member. He would finally submits that the Court may pass appropriate orders.
8. Considering the submissions made and in the light of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, that the crime is registered on 22.11.2024, that there is no steady progress in the investigation, since, only 32 witnesses are examined so far. The petitioners are residents of Mumbai. In addition to that initially a complaint has been given by Accused No.2 against the defacto complainant and thereafter, the present case has been come to
light. As the investigation is at nascent stage, coming to the logical conclusion, also the fact that a Coordinate Bench of this Court granted interim protection to the petitioners vide order dated 24.02.2025 in Crl.P.No.1414 of 2025, order dated 31.01.2025 in Crl.P.No.815 of 2025, orders dated 08.04.2025 in Crl.P.Nos.2332, 2333 and 2334 of 2025, orders dated 02.05.2025 in Crl.P.Nos. 4424 and 4435 of 2025 and order dated 25.09.2025 in Crl.P.No.9812 of 2025 respectively and considering the fact that nothing is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner has misused the liberty which is granted to them, it is apposite to dispose of these applications with a direction to the Investigating Agency to continue the said interim protection subject to the conduct of the petitioners during the course of proceedings in this case.
9. In that view of the matter, the Criminal Petitions are disposed of with the following conditions: i. Investigating Agency shall proceed with the investigation in all aspects without resorting to any coercive steps of arrest against the petitioners, subject to their conduct and compliance of the conditions referred infra; ii. The petitioners shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required and shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer for further investigation. iii. The petitioners shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses; iv. The petitioners shall surrender their passports, if any, to the Investigating Officer. If they claim that they do not have passport, they shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Court concerned.
v. The petitioners shall furnish all information and produce any material documents relating to the present crime, if required, to facilitate and conclude the investigation.
vi. The petitioners shall not leave the country, without express permission from the concerned Court.
vii. The petitioners shall furnish their working mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer to monitor their movements.
viii. The petitioners shall refrain from conducting any press meets and shall not directly or indirectly make any statements relating to this case in the social media or any other social network platform.
ix. The petitioners shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, once in a week i.e., on every Sunday, between 10:00 AM and 05:00 PM, till further orders.
x. In violation of any conditions imposed by this Court from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the prosecution is at liberty to file a petition for cancellation of the interim protection from arrest granted to the petitioners.
As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.
___________________________________
DR.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 11.03.2026. UPS
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos: 1414, 815, 2332, 2333, 2334, 4424, 4435, 9122 and 9812 of 2025 Dt: 11.03.2026
UPS