Partly allowed

Ramisetti Seshamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC23 Nov 2023CRLP/9098/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court partly allowed a criminal petition seeking to quash docket orders. The Court quashed the case under Section 188 IPC citing Section 195 Cr.P.C. and directed the petitioner to approach the trial court regarding non-bailable warrant due to age.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the case under Section 188 IPC; direction to appear before trial court and file fresh application for recall of NBW.

Ramisetti Seshamma Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBE^ n<br>TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
i.f
05
UJ
PRESENT
O
A-

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI P

¶4

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9098 OF 207.-^

¶5

Between:

¶6

rllU V®"kateswarlu, aged 71 years, Occ. Cultivation, DiSict ^ ^ Sivalayam, Undavalli Vilalge, Tadepalli^{Mandal,Guntur}

¶7

...Petitioner/Accused AND ''®P Prosecutor, High Court of A P Amaravathi through SHO, Tadepalli P.S. Guntur District. ...Respondent/Complainant ct.foH P''^y*'^g that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may r^r pertaining to Docket Orders dt. 15.07.2022 passedⁱⁿ X;no^ ® Principal Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri and consequently Quash the Docket Orders dt. 15.07.2022 passed in C.C.No.363/2020 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Mangalag in

¶8

LA. NO: 2 OF 2023

¶9

statori Tn ,h» M™''®'' 1“ of Cr.P.C praying that in^{thecircumstances} stated m the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may orders dt in 11^9099° farther proceedings pursuant to docket M F C.C.No.363/2020 on the file of the Principal Junior^Civil Judge, Mangalagiri pending disposal of the Criminal Petition.

¶10

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Srinivasulu Kurra, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶11

The Court made the following:

¶12

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶13

CRIMINAL PETITION No.9098 of 2023

¶14

ORDER:

¶15

This instant Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short “Cr.P.C.”), by the petitioner/Accused, to quash the docket orders dated 15.07.2022 passed in C.C.No.363 of 2020 by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri for the offence under^Section 188 IPC and Section 34(A) of A. P. Excise Act.

¶16

Heard Sri Srinivasulu Kurra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor^fortheState.

¶17

As can be seen from the record, the case under Section 188 IPC is also lodged against the petitioner based^onthePolice proceedings. That cannot be done in the light of a^clearbar under Section 195 of Cr.P.C. Hence, the offence under^Section 188 IPC is hereby quashed.

¶18

Coming to the grievance of the petitioner, because^ofher old age, she could not attend the Court on a given dated. thereby, the trial Court issued NBW against her. Though^she filed a petition to recall the NBW, the said petition is pending before the trial Court because of her absence.

¶19

Taking into consideration of the grievance of the petitioner, she is directed to appear before the trial Court on 27.11.2023 and file a fresh application under Section 70(2) of the Code before the trial Court, On filing such application, the learned Magistrate may pass appropriate orders on the very same day by taking^some security bond from the petitioner for her appearance.

¶20

In the result, the criminal petition is partly allowed with the above observations.

¶21

Pending applications, if any, shall stands closed.

¶22

SD/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR-

//TRUE COPY//

To.

SECTION OFFICER

The Principal Junior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri, Guntur District.

¶27

The Station House Officer, Tadepalli P.S. Guntur District.

¶28

One CC to Sri. Srinivasulu Kurra Advocate [OPUC]

¶29

Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies

PR PRK

4, \

HIGH COURT

DATED:23/11/2023

ORDER

CRLP.No.9098 of 2023

k'p I T [o2^llDl.ii

g 0 'f MA« ?02^
09
Current Section
'•5 >^£SPATCVJ^

¶38

PARTLY ALLOWING THE CRLP

Ramisetti Seshamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramisetti Seshamma v. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vuyyuru Surendra Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Katta Srinivasa Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B Singh Vs the State of Ap

N.Rakesh, Vs Rayalaseema University

Kambala Sai Venkata Rao Vs Smt.Kambala Siva Durga Pavani at Natipam Siva Durga Pavani

Shaik Mohammad Rafi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh