1 CRL.P. No.3043 of 2025 APHC010137442025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3043/2025 Between: M/s Sirocco Partners ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. ARRABOLU SAI NAVEEN Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 CRL.P. No.3043 of 2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION No.3043 OF 2025 ORDER: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order, dated 01.02.2025, passed in Crl.M.P.No.466 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.108 of 2023, by the II Additional District & Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, whereby the learned Sessions Judge directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount before the trial court within 60 days from the date of the order. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has raised a fundamental defence that, when amounts are drawn in the name of the Company without making the Company as a party accused in the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complaint is not maintainable. 4. This is the second round of litigation challenging the deposit of 20% of the compensation directed by the appellate court. The petitioner filed Crl.P. No.1780 of 2024, challenging the order dated 22.02.2024, passed in Crl.M.P. No.446 of 2023 by the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam.This Court, after considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon reviewing the order, held that the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge was devoid of 3 CRL.P. No.3043 of 2025 reasons. As a result, the matter was remanded to the learned Sessions Judge for disposal with proper reasoning. 5. The present criminal petition is filed challenging the order,dated 01.02.2025, passed in Crl.M.P.No.446 of 2023. As seen from the order, the learned Sessions Judge has considered the conditions that need to be complied with, the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in various judgments referred to in the order and directed the petitioner to deposit of 20% of the compensation amount within 60 days from the date of the order.The 2ndrespondent, even as per his complaint, has deposited the amount into the account of the partnership firm which was arraigned as an accused in the complaint before the trial court.Thus, this court, without going into the merits of the case, finds no reason to interfere with the well reasoned order of the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam. 6. In the result, the criminal petition is dismissed. 7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Dt.24.03.2025 BV 4 CRL.P. No.3043 of 2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION No.3043 OF 2025 24.03.2025 BV