APHC010113502025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2890/2025 Between: Choudari Appalanaidu ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 The Court made the following Order: Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is arraigned as accused in FIR No.36 of 2025 on the file of the Amudalavalasa Police Station, Srikakulam District, for the alleged offences under Sections 351(2) and 108 read with Section 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed a civil suit for the recovery of an amount, and a decree for Rs. 6,30,000/- was passed by the Court after a trial. 3. It is alleged that the petitioner approached the deceased at his house and threatened the deceased. The suit for recovery against the 2nd respondent resulted in a decree for an amount of Rs.6,30,000/- after the trial. 4. It is further alleged that the petitioner went to the house of the 2nd respondent to demand the money. 5. In the statement of the deceased, it is stated that the petitioner threatened the deceased and his family members with dragging them to Court and the Police Station if the amount was not paid. On such utterances, the deceased became disturbed 3 and consumed poison, which led to his death. On the complaint of the 2nd respondent, the Police registered a case under Sections 351(2) and 108 read with Section 62 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, even according to the statement of the deceased, the petitioner cannot be held responsible for the actions committed by the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the judgment of this Court in CRL.P. No. 1495 of 2001, following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Siya Ram vs. State of U.P., wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that mere feeling of insult or humiliation due to comments or utterances made by the accused does not make the accused guilty of an offence under Section 306 of the IPC. 7. Considering the above, the SHO, Amudalavalasa Police Station, is directed to complete the investigation in FIR No. 36 of 2025, without taking any coercive steps against the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. 4 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________ HARINATH.N, J Date: 18.03.2025 LSP 5 436 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2890/2025 Date: 18.03.2025 LSP