Single judge observed offences punishable under less than seven years imprisonment hold no further coercive action by police remanded under Section 41A Cr.P.C. following Arnesh Kumar guidelines and disposed of petition no substantive order.
Police directed to follow Section 41A Cr.P.C. procedure for coercive action.
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
FRIDAY ,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
o
•(
s' /n
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDD^^gJ^^
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 868 OF 2024
Between;
AND
...Respondents
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. 16 of 2024 dt.02-02-2024 of Yadiki UPS Police Station, Anantapuramu District, registered U/Sec.295, 341, 506 r/w 34 of IPC, 3(1)(k)(r), of SC & ST (POA) Act, against the Petitioners. I.A. NO; 1 OF 2024
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 Grant Stay of all further proceedings of investigation in connection with the FIR.No. 16 of 2024 registered by Yadiki UPS Police Station, Anantapuramu including the arrest of the Petitioners. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri P Rajesh Babu, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the RespondentNo.2
The Court made the following: ORDER
/
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY ,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 868/2024
Between:
Gangireddy Srinivasa Reddy and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND
State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
1.P RAJESH BABU
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
The Court made the following:
ORDER
This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,hasbeenfiledonbehalfof the petitioners herein/Al & A2, to quash the proceedingsinCrimeNo. 16of2024of Yadiki UPS Police Station, Anantapuramu District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 295, 341, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and 3(l)(k)(r) of SC/ST POA Act, 1989.
- Learned counsel for the petitioners, after arguing for some time, has confined his argument to the extent of protecting the petitioners herein/ A1 & A2 from the coercive action by the police on the ground that the offences alleged are punishable
with imprisonment of less than seven years and prays this Court to direct the police to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 41A of Cr.P.C.
- Heard. Perused the material on record. 5. Since the offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years, this Court directs the police to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 41A of Cr.P.C. scrupulously as per the guidelines enunciated in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another^.
\
- With the above directions, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. 7. As'^^a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this V ' -MCriminal^fetition, $haM Stand closed. 1 (2014t« SCC 273
SD/- A VENUGOPALA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
To,
SECTION OFFICER
SAM
vna
HIGH COURT
DATED: 15/03/2024
ORDER
CRLP.No.868 of 2024
DISPOSING OF THE CRLP
,'4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether police must follow Section 41A Cr.P.C. procedure for offences punishable with less than seven years of imprisonment.
Whether a Criminal Petition can be disposed of when counsel withdraws substantive grounds.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Arnesh Kumar v. State of BiharExplained¶37
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another (2014) 2 SCC 273 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Gangireddy Srinivasa Reddy
Gangireddy Ramanjula Reddy
State of Andhra Pradesh
Kambagiri Ramudu
K Sreenivasa Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
