IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABALE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Criminal Petition No.1669 of 2009 Between: Bitla Murali … Petitioner and The State of A.P., rep.by P.P., Through P.S. Nagireddipet, Nizamabad District and others. … Respondents THE HONOURABALE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Criminal Petition No.1669 of 2009 ORDER: This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to call for the records relating to the FIR. No.95 of 2008 of Nagireddypet Police Station, Nizamabad District and quash the same. Brief facts of the case are that based on the complaint dated 16.10.2008 lodged by the 2nd respondent, de facto complainant, that the machinery belongs to the Seed Farm Malthumeda were committed theft by unknown offenders from the State Seed Farm Malthumeda during the years 2006-2007 worth about Rs.72,500/-, the 3rd respondent registered a crime in FIR. No.95 of 2008 under Section 379 IPC. Thereafter, the petitioner was arrested and subsequently released on bail. During the course of investigation, the 3rd respondent examined and recorded the statements of the complainant and LWs 2 and 3, wherein the petitioner, accused, found guilty of offence under Section 379 IPC. The learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, would submit that the averments made by the 2nd respondent in his complaint cannot constitutes offence punishable under Section 379 IPC, as charged by the 3rd respondent, because on 15.10.2008 itself, the officer concerned of the Assistant Director of Agriculture received the alleged theft articles, as such, the question of alleged theft does not arise. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that this Court on 21.08.2009 extended the interim stay, already granted, till 12.10.2009 and thereafter, there was no extension of the interim stay. Therefore, charge sheet was filed and the trial is commenced. Hence, at this juncture, no interference of this Court is required and this criminal petition is liable to be dismissed. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and the nature of the allegations made against the petitioner and as the charge sheet had already been filed and the trial has been commenced, I do not see any reason to interfere, at this juncture. Hence, this petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this criminal petition is dismissed. _________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 19.10.2011 LSK