APHC010148142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3207/2025 Between: Muppavarapu Hemanth Kumar, ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. PAPUDIPPU SASHIDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.1102 of 2024 in C.C.No.402 of 2019. The petitioner has filed petition under Sections 91 and 311 of Cr.P.C., seeking to summon the Income Tax Officer, Ward No.2(1), Ground Floor, Central Revenue Building, M.G.Road, Vijayawada to produce I.T. returns of 2 the complainant and also to summon the Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, Governorpet branch to produce the statement of account pertaining to the respondent company. The learned Magistrate has allowed the petition filed by the petitioner in part by issuing handover summons to the petitioner/accused on payment of batta to summon the Branch Manager, Union Bank of India and the Branch Manager to produce the statement of account of the complainant along with the memo register for the period from 01.10.2015 to 30.11.2015. The learned Magistrate has dismissed the prayer of summoning the Income Tax returns of the respondent from the Income Tax Department. The learned Magistrate has given reasons for denying the summoning of the Income Tax Officer and the I.T. returns. The learned Magistrate has adequately considered the cross examination of the PW1 and as such found it not necessary to summon the Income Tax returns of the complainant. 3. This Court finds no grounds to interfere in the well considered order of the learned Magistrate and accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 4. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N BMS