APHC010649852025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3396]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12485/2025 Between:

BOGGARAPU NAGARAJU, S/O B. SUBBA GURUVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O H.NO. 25/695/11, FLAT NO 101, SAI RESIDENCY, SRINIVASA NAGAR, NADYALA.

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHI, THROUGH S.H.O., NANDYALA III TOWN POLICE STATION, NADYALA DISTRICT.

2. MANU ITTINA, S/O. LATE I. MAHABALESHWARAPPA, R/O. 380, ITTINA CENTER KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE TOWN, KARNATAKA STATE. RESPONDENT NO.2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE COURT ORDER DATED 12.12.2025 IN CRL.P.NO.12485 OF

2025.

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

1. P M MITHILESHWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

1. D S SIVADARSHAN

2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following:

ORDER

The instant Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), by the Petitioner / Accused No.1 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.31 of 2025 on the file of Nandyal III Town Police Station, Nandyal District which is registered for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and

474 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’).

2. Heard Sri K.S.Murthy, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri P.M.Mithileswara Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Sri Avinash Desai, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri D.S.Sivadarshan, learned counsel for Respondent No.2 and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1 / State.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner has not committed any offences much less the alleged offences. Learned Senior Counsel would further submit that there are business transactions between the Petitioner and Respondent No.2 from the year 2010 and the same were continued for several years. It is further submitted that, disputes arose between them in the year 2018 on account of financial transactions, due to the failure of Respondent No.2 to return substantial development funds borrowed from the Petitioner.

Learned Senior Counsel would further submit that, in view of such defaults, Petitioner was constrained to initiate legal proceedings against Respondent No.2 including 28 cheque bounce cases and 12 civil suits, involving an aggregate amount exceeding Rs.60 Crores. Respondent No.2 had entered appearance and filed written statements in all the civil suits in the year 2019, thereby acknowledging the pendency of civil disputes between the parties.

Learned Senior Counsel would contend that the present criminal proceedings are clear abuse of process, arising out of the said financial disputes. The present crime came to be registered alleging that certain receipts filed in O.S.No.18 of 2019 are forged. It is submitted that a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.3655 of 2025, while permitting investigation to continue, specifically directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against the Petitioner herein along with other Accused.

Learned Senior Counsel would further submit that the respondent police conducted a search at the premises of the accused and allegedly seized certain documents, including letterheads and cheques of the complainant’s company. Based on the very same alleged recovery, another FIR in Crime No.111 of 2025 was registered at Kormangala Police Station, Karnataka. The Karnataka High Court has stayed all further proceedings in the said crime.

Learned Senior Counsel further contends that, thereafter, multiple FIRs bearing Nos.86, 87, 88, 89, and 90 of 2025 were registered on same set of allegations i.e., the receipts filed in various civil suits of the year 2019 are forged. Yet another FIR in Crime No.97 of 2025, was registered on simil