Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 9254
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
N. HARINATH, J
P. Lakshmi – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6466 OF 2025 | C.C. No. 93 of 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri N SIVA REDDY
For the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Civil disputes should not be converted into criminal proceedings, and the court must ensure proceedings remain within their proper nature.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Quashing of proceedings - Petitioners challenged proceedings against them in C.C. No. 93 of 2024 alleging civil disputes taking a criminal turn - Court stayed all further proceedings against petitioners in the interest of justice. (Paras 1, 2, 3)
(B) Issues of civil nature cannot be tried as criminal offences - The court noted that the matter revolved around a money recovery dispute which should remain civil, hence the need for quashing. (Paras 4-5)
Findings of Court:
The proceedings were stayed considering the nature of allegations being civil, and a criminal flavor was inappropriate for resolution.
Result: Stay granted in favor of petitioners regarding further proceedings.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of petitioners and the nature of proceedings. (Para 2) |
| 2. submission on the civil nature of disputes. (Para 3) |
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of sri N SIVA REDDY, Advocate for the petitioners and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent No.1, the Court made the following;
ORDER:
ff Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant public Prosecutor appearI-ng for the State.
The learned counsel for the petl-tioners submits that the petI-tI-OnerS are arraigned as Accused Mos. 1 to 5 I-n C.C. No. 93 of 2O24 on the file of the v Add][tionaf Jun[-or CI-Vi] Judge, Tjrupat]-. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent had flled a civl-I SUI-I against the petit[-oners, which was not prosecuted and was dismissed for default. lt I-s also submitted that the suit was fI-led for recovery of an amount.
lt is submitted that the c]-vi[ disputes are now given a criminal flavour, and even as per the compla]-nt and charge sheet, the issue would revolve around the a[[eged money which was pal-a to the petlltjoners| ]t is also submI-tted that the amount relates to a sale transaction of the property whI-Ch iS in possession of the 2nd respondent. It is submitted that there have been third-party claims over the said property, and the 2nd respondent wanted the petitioners to refund her money as she could not get clear possession of the property. It is also submitted that the 2nd respondent has obtained permission from the competent authorities and has constructed a house ancl is staying on the said property. However, the civil issue is now given a criminal flavour.
Considering the submissions, there shall be a stay of all further Proceedings inSOfar aS the Petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 is concerned in C.C.No.93 of 2024 on the file of the V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupati.
The learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to take out personal notice to the 2nd respondent by registered post with acknowledgment due and file proof of service in the Registry.
Post the matter on o7.08.2025."
SD/-K.J.RAJA BABu \-I--_ _
ASSISTANT TEAR //TRUE COPY//
OREET:
For I SECTION To]
1. TheVAdditionalJuniorCiviIJudge,Tl-rupati z
2. G. Vani Kumari, W/o Sri Venkateswara Rao R/o Door No. 8-2-603/23/7, Road No.10, Banjarahills, Hyderabad -500 034 (by RPAD) pf
3. OneCCto SRl. NSIVAREDDYAdvocate[OPUC] Zz 4. Two CCsto Public Prosecutor, High Court ofAP [OUT] #f
