K.Padmavathi v. The State Of Ap.,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ***** CRIMINAL PETITION No.7849 of 2015 Between:

K.Padmavathi ... Petitioner/A-8 and The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Public Prosecutor and another ... Respondents DATE OF JUDGEMENT PRONOUNCED: 12-08-2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to Yes/No see the fair copy of the Judgment?

HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.7849 of 2015 ORDER :

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.159 of 2015 of Sullurpet Police Station, SPSR Nellore District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 467, 468, 420, 419 read with 109 I.P.C.

2) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/A-8 and also the 1st respondent-State represented by the Public Prosecutor before admission, before ordering notice to the 2nd respondent and perused the material on record.

3) The petitioner herein is the Joint Sub-Registrar among 9 accused including A-9 Sub-Registrar of Kalahasti. A-1, A-4 and A-5 are brothers, A-3 is their mother, A-2 is wife of A-1, A-6 and A-7 are attestors of the document and the case of the defacto-complainant/2nd respondent who is no other than wife of A-4 is that by pretending as if the defactocomplainant and wife of A-4, A-2 at the instance of the other accused in the Special Power of Attorney in favour of A-5 signed by impersonation and they are all privy to it.

4) It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner/A-8 that but for ascertaining he cannot show the identity for having to say he got any personal acquaintance for personal identity and if at all the persons identified before

the Sub-Registrar that are liable and not himself being a public officer in discharge of his duties. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is in progress, there are no grounds to admit the application for quashing the F.I.R.

5) As referred supra, the facts fall short for this Court to admit the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C but for the factual matrix shows the entitlement of concession of bail by the petitioner.

6) Accordingly, this petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to surrender before the learned Magistrate and move for regular bail and in such an event the learned Magistrate shall grant bail on the same day with necessary conditions and dispense with her presence at post bail stage before the Court. Further remedies are left open to the petitioner after filing charge sheet and after taking cognizance by the learned Magistrate.

7) The miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_________________________ Dr. B. SIVA SANKARA RAO, J Dt.12th August, 2015 KSH