Kalluri Krishna Reddy And Another v. The State Of A.P., Rep. By P.P., H.C., Hyd. And Another

SMT JUSTI CE T. RAJANI CRI MI NAL PETI TI ON No.2 6 3 4 of 2 0 1 1 ORDER:

This petition is filed seeking for quash of the proceedings in Crime No.52 of 2011 on the file of Yadagirigutta Police Station, Nalgonda District.

2.

Heard the counsel for the petitioners; the Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st respondent and the counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.

3.

The counsel for the petitioners contends that there was rivalry between one N. Suresh and the petitioners and hence, that is the basis for this case.

4.

A perusal of the complaint shows that the complaint was not given by the said Suresh. It was given by the complainant, who is the headmistress of the School from where allegedly the petitioners obtained a bona fide certificate by projecting themselves as one Suresh. Later, the said Suresh called her and brought to her notice that the persons, who approached her, are not genuine persons and he questioned her saying as to how she issued the said certificate at the request of such persons. Thereby, she chose to give this report. Hence, the alleged rivalry between Suresh and the petitioner has no role in the headmaster filing the complaint. The fact remains that some persons approached the complainant representing to be Suresh. It is that act of those persons that is complained of.

5.

The delay in filing the complaint, which is contended to be a basis for quashing the proceedings, is not an inordinate delay. The incident occurred in the afternoon on 03.03.2011 and the complaint was given on the next day at 11: 30 hours. Hence, the reasons for the delay and all would only come to light after due investigation. The complainant mentioned in the complaint that she can identify the persons, who approached her. Hence, this is not a case where proceedings can be quashed at this stage and investigation has to be definitely taken up to bring out the truth. 5.

With the above observations, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. Interim stay granted earlier, if any, shall stand vacated. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ T. RAJANI , J November 27, 2017 LMV