APHC010081372026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3521]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1244/2026 Between:

1. M EDISETTI APPALA RAJU,, S/O. RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O.16-16/4, VSK HOMES, MANGAPURAM STREET, PRAHLADAPURAM COLONY, GOPALAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM.

2. M EDISETTY ANANTHA LAKSHMI,, W/O. APPALA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC HOSUEWIFE, R/O.16-16/4, VSK HOMES, MANGAPURAM STREET, PRAHLADAPURAM COLONY, GOPALAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM.

3. K SR SATYA PAVAN KUMAR,, S/O.APPA RAO, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O.6-386/1, VUDA APARTMENT, VEPAGUNTA, PENDURTHI, VISAKHAPATNAM.

4. S MT.MEDISETTY HARIKA ALIAS BINDU,, D/O.APPALA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O.16-16/4, VSK HOMES, MANGAPURAM STREET, PRAHLADAPURAM COLONY, GOPALAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM.

5. K UNDRAPU APPALA RAJU,, S/O.LATE RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O.8-272/3/3, VUDA COLONY, GOPALAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM.

6. S MT.KUNDRAPU SUJATHA,, W/O. APPALA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O.8-272/3/3, VUDA COLONY, GOPALAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM.

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)

AND

1. S TATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, HYDERABAD. THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, IV TOWN P.S., VISAKHAPATNAM.

2. K UTCHARLAPATI VENKATA SURYANARAYANA RAJU, S/O.CHANDRA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O.50-121-54/1 /A, BALAYYA SASTRY LAYOUT, SEETHAMMADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM.

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

1. KONA N.D.V.RAMANA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following:

ORDER

The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.,’)/Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) seeking to quash the proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused No.1, 2, 4 and 7 in FIR No.17 of 2020 on the file of the IV Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) read with 61(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’).

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

3. As per the MOU, some of the petitioners allegedly failed to achieve the targets fixed by respondent No.2. The FIR has been registered for the alleged offences of criminal breach of trust and cheating. However, both offences do not ordinarily go together.

4. In Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Crl.A.No.3114 of 2024 dated 23.08.2025 the Hon’ble Apex Court observed that the offences of criminal breach of trust and cheating cannot coexist simultaneously.

5. Further in N. Raghavender v. State of Andhra Pradesh, Crl.A.No.5 of 2010 dated 13.12.2021 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court observed that prosecution had failed to prove charges under Section 409, 420, and 477A of ‘the I.P.C.,’ and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of ‘the Act.,’ on the ground that no financial loss was caused to the bank, or to any customer; no conspiracy was established; the bank official committed gross misconduct by misusing his position, by acting himself in dereliction of his duties, but there was no criminal misconduct fall under the ambit of Section 409, 420 and 477A of ‘the I.P.C’.

6. Furthermore, K. Bharathi Devi v. State of Telangana, (2024) 10 SCC 384 wherein at para No.34 it is held as under:

“34…It has been held that there are certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil flavor having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or a family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim and the offender and the victim have settled all disputes betwee