The petitioner filed a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 478 of 2020 and a stay of proceedings. The court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution as the petitioner was not represented during the hearing.
None granted; petition dismissed for non-prosecution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5070 OF 2090
Between:
Kolan Shekar Reddy, S/o Kolan Yadi Reddy, aged about 38 years, Occ. Pvt. Employee, R/o H.No,28/304, 3™ Floor, Gandhar, Sahara Estate Mansuoorabad, Tatti Annaram, Ranga Reddy-500068.
...Petitioner/Accused No. 3 AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad. Through SHO. Anandapuram P S, Visakhapatnam City.
...Respondent/Defacto Complainant
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying that in the circumstances stated In the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the FIR No. 478 of 2020 on the file of the P.S Anandapuram, Visakhapatnam City for the offences under section 34 (a) of AP Excise Act, 1968 against the Petitioner.
L-A. NO: 1 OF 7n?n
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings including
4
arrest of the petitioner in FIR No.478 of 2020 on the file of the P.S. Anandapuram, Visakhapatnam City, pending disposal of the above quash petition.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Podili Bosu Babu, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.
The Court made the following ORDER-:
1 )
X'
APHC010313132020
0^
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3396]
THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
THE
PRESENT HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5070/2020
Between: ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED Kolan Shekar Reddy
AND ...respondent/complainant The State Of Andhra Pradesh
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1.POD1LI BOSU BABU
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
482 of the Code of Criminal The instant petition under Section been filed by the Cr.P.C.”) has Procedure, 1973 (in short seeking quashment of the proceedings against Petitioner/Accused No.3 of Anandapuram Police Station, him in F.I.R.No.478 of 2020 Visakhapatnam City registered under Section 34(A) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968. is listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, none 2. Despite the matter is represented for the Petitioner.
2
VJP,J Crl.P.No.5070 of 2020
B
- The docket proceedings dated 12.01.2024 and 01.05.2024 show, none represented for the petitioner.
- Ms. D.Prasanna Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State/Respondent is in attendance.
- Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall
stand closed.
To
//TRUE COPY//
M.PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTAN" REGISTRAR
s^ctiSn officer
SD sree
HIGH COURT
DATED: 02/05/2024
ORDER
CRLP.No.5070 of 2020
DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION FOR NON PROSECUTION
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash FIR No. 478 of 2020 registered under Section 34(A) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968.
Whether to grant stay of proceedings pending disposal of the quash petition.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kolan Shekar Reddy
The State Of Andhra Pradesh
VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
