Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(AP) 7065
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRSENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 572 OF 2010 Between:
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND:
1. M/s. Muralidhar Chit Funds Pvt.Ltd., Rep. by Thetakayala Rama Rao, Santhi Nagar, Tuni, E.G.Dist.
2. Thetakayala Rama Rao, S/o Somaiah, Managing Director, M/s. Muralidhar Chit Funds Pvt.Ltd.
Santhi Nagar, Tuni, E.G.Dist.
3. Patri Uma Maheswara Rao, S/o Seshagiri Rao, R/o D.No.7-7-10, Muthilingayyagari Street, Tuni, E.G.Dist.
4. Thetakayala Satyavani, W/o Rama Rao, Santhi Nagar, Tuni, E.G.Dist.
5. Bhogavarapu Surya Simhadri Varaha Narasimha Raju @ Chian Babu, S/o Venkata Appala Raju, R/o D.No.6-22-6, Raja Street, Tuni, E.G.Dist.
6. Bhogavarapu Appala Raju @ B.A.Raju, S/o Pentabbai, R/o Markandrajupeta, Tuni, E.G.Dist.
7. Polisetti Vishnusree, W/o P.V.S.N.Murthy, Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam.
8. Thetakayala Satya Sudha @ Ujjina Sudha, D/o Rama Rao, W/o Kishore Kumar, Near Vinayak Temple, Nidadavale, W.G.Dist.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner(s): Y L SIVAKALPANA REDDY(SC CUM SPL PP,CID)
Counsel for the Respondents: N SIVA REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.572 of 2010
Order:
This Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the order, dated 06.03.2009 passed in Crl.M.P.No.374-A of 2009 arising out of C.C.No.1 of 2007 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry.
2. Originally, a case in Crime No.53 of 2022 of Tuni Town police station was registered against A1 to A8. Thereafter, the Inspector of Police, CID, RCIU, Visakhapatnam, after completion of investigation, filed charge sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120-B r/w 34 IPC, Sections 3, 4, 5 & 6 r/w 56 of the Andhra Pradesh Chit Fund Act, 1971 and Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999, and the same was taken on file as C.C.No.1 of 2007 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, East Godavari. Pending the said Calendar Case, the learned Sessions Judge heard the learned counsel before framing of charge, and vide order dated 06.03.2009, the learned Principal Sessions Judge discharged the accused of the offence punishable under Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999, and transferred the case to the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajahmundry for trial and disposal of the same for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120B read with 34 IPC and 4 and 5 of the Prize Chit and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act.
3. Heard. Perused the record.
4. Under Section 2 (c) of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999, ‘financial establishment’ means an individual, an association or body of individuals or a firm carrying on the business or receiving deposits under any scheme or arrangement or in any other manner, but does not include a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (Central Act 1 ot 1956), or …. A.1 company – M/s. Muralidhar Chit Funds Private Limited was established and registered under the provisions of the Companies Act and it is not a financial establishment by the date of committing the offences alleged. By the date of committing the offences alleged, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 was not within the purview of Section 2 (c) of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999. When the legal position is clear to the above extent, the accused cannot be forced to undergo rigmarole of trial for the aforesaid offence punishable under Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999. The Court below rightly discharged the accused of the said Section and there is no infirmity in the impugned Order.
5. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the order passed by the Court below is unambiguous and this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed thereon by the Court below.
6. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Revision Case shall stand closed.
_____________________
K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J Date:27.04.2023 Asr HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY Criminal Revision Case No.572 of 2010 Dated:27.04.2023 Asr
