HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Harinath.N, J
Battu Anil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is arrayed as accused in C.C.No.15 of 2017 on the file of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole, for alleged offences under Sections 206 , 207, 208, 420 read with 34 of IPC. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.6 for having attested his signature as a witness to a deed of mortgage between the 1st accused and the 2nd accused.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was unaware of the purport of the deed of mortgage executed between the accused Nos.1 and 2 and at request of accused No.2, who belongs to the same village, acted as a witness to the said transaction. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent has filed a private complaint before the III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole, which was taken on file as C.C.No.295 of 2016 by the learned Magistrate for the alleged offences.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, even as seen from the complaint, except for a vague statement that the accused Nos.6 and 7 are attestors of the mortgage deed and that they were close acquaintances of accused Nos.1 and 2 at the deed of mortgage is a sham transactio
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.