Allowed

Padarthi Naveen Kumar, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC15 Jul 2022CRLP/5141/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal petition against tobacco product violations, the High Court quashed proceedings in light of a prior common order (C.P. No. 3731 of 2018). The case was filesuomotu by police and covered by the earlier decision.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings against petitioners in Crime No. 146 of 2022 and closure of pending miscellaneous applications.

Padarthi Naveen Kumar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶2

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5141 OF 2022

¶3

Between:-

¶4

Padarthi Naveen Kumar and another

¶5

… Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2

¶6

and

¶7

The State of Andhra Pradesh represented by Represented by its Public Prosecutor.

¶8

… Respondent

¶9

Counsel for the petitioners : Mr.Rama Rao Kochiri Counsel for the respondent : The Public Prosecutor

¶10

ORDER :

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent.

¶12

The present Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.146 of 2022 on the file of Cumbum Police Station, Prakasam District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(2), 24(1) read with Section 6(A), 7(2), 8(3), 10 of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 and consequently direct the concerned Police to return the property seized in connection with the Crime.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioners while placing reliance on the decision of this Court in Criminal Petition No.3731 of 2018 and batch, dated 27.8.2018, submits that the matter is squarely covered by the said decision and the present

¶14

¶15

Criminal Petition deserves to be allowed by quashing the proceedings against the petitioners.

¶16

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor fairly submits that the matter is covered by the common order passed in Criminal Petition No.3731 of 2018 and batch, dated 27.8.2018.

¶17

This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides. A reading of the copy of the F.I.R., filed along with the material papers would clearly show that the Police have suo motu registered the Crime against the petitioners in this case.

¶18

Since the present case is squarely covered by the decision in Criminal Petition No.3731 of 2018 and batch dated 27.8.2018, for the reasons alike, the Criminal Petition is allowed, quashing the proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.146 of 2022 on the file of Cumbum Police Station, Prakasam District. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶19

________________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J

¶20

vasu

¶21

July 15, 2022.

Padarthi Naveen Kumar, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Padarthi Naveen Kumar, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G Ramanjaneyulu Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Manne Veeraa Rani Vs The District Collector

DharaniKota Srinivas, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B C Prameela Vs Sri N Bharath Gupta

Vemula Parvathi, Vs Kunkalaguntla Satyanarayana (Died)

J Subba Reddy Vs Y v Narasimham