C O M M O N O R D E R

Since the petitioner / accused and the respondent / complaint are common in all the four cases and petitions under Section 311 Cr.P.C., were filed in Crl.M.P.Nos.16688, 16684, 16689 & 16685 of 2025 respectively, all of which have been dismissed by the trial Court, the present petitions have been filed challenging the same. The issue involved in all the cases is identical. Hence, by way of a common order, all four cases are disposed of.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that, in these cases, the original complainant, G.K. Reddy has nominated his Power of Attorney holder, V.Raghupathi, Manager, to prosecute the complaint. According to the petitioner, V. Raghupathi is a third party and does not know either the complainant or the accused and no document has been filed to show that V.Raghupathi is working as a Manager of the complainant. Further, there is