CRL.P. No.4208 OF 2025 APHC010175252025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4208/2025 Between: Vemuri Vimala Rani ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND Nereti Lakshmaiah and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. KONDIPARTHI V RATNAKAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2. The Court made the following: CRL.P. No.4208 OF 2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION No.4208 of 2025 ORDER: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arraigned as an accused in S.T.C.No.40 of 2022 on the file of the Court of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, at Gurazala, for the alleged offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. The learned counsel further submits that on 03.02.2023, for non appearance of the petitioner, the learned Magistrate has issued a non- bailable warrant. The petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.336 of 2024 seeking recall of the non-bailable warrant. The said criminal M.P. was allowed by imposing a condition requiring the accused (petitioner herein) to execute a personal bond of Rs.5,000/- along with two sureties by the next hearing date without fail. However, the petitioner could not furnish the sureties, as the 1st respondent allegedly obstructed those willing to stand as sureties whenever they appeared before the Court. On 11.02.2025, when the petitioner, accompanied by two other sureties working as Sweepers in the Municipal Corporation, arrived at the Court to comply with its orders, they were warned by the 1st respondent. As a result, they refused to stand as sureties. The incident was reported to the police, yet no action has been taken. CRL.P. No.4208 OF 2025 4. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is intending to comply with the direction of the learned Magistrate for recalling the warrant, however, requests further time. 5. Considering the peculiar circumstances of the case, the time for compliance is extended by three more weeks from the date of this order. Meanwhile, there shall be stay on the execution of the non- bailable warrant against the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of. 7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal petition shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Dt.22.04.2025 BV