N - APHC010218422024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRIVIAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3341 OF 2024 Between: Y Soma Raju, S/o. Narasimha Rao, Hindu, Male, Age-46 years, Occ- Advocate, R/o. Ramaraopeta, Tadepalligudem, W.G.District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through Station House Officer, Veeravalli P.S., Krishna District, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Amaravathi. 2. Yellaiah Chowdary Sadineni, S/o. Seetharamaiah, Male, Age-60 years, Occ-A.E, Housing Ungutur Mandal, Ro. Flat No.401, Block No.3, Royal Luxuary Apartments, Road No.2 Ramachandra Nagar, Vijayawada-520008. Ganesh Nagar, Sri ...Respondents Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that this High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 6 of 2024 pending on the file of The Special Magistrate Court at Nuziveedu, Krishna District against the Petitioner/ Accused 'f' % lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that this High Court may be pleased to stayall further Proceedings in C.C.No. 6 of 2024 on the file of The Special Magistrate Court at Nuziveedu, Krishna District. iA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that this High Court may be pleased to extend the interim orders which were initially granted on 7-5-2024 in CRLP No. 3341 of 2024 until further orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI. P. VIVEK Counsel for the Respondents: SRI. PEDDIBHOTLA VENKATA SAI RAJESH Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following order: 1 APHC010218422024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) • I [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAN AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3341/2024 Between: 1.Y SOMA RAJU, S/0. NARASIMHA RAO, OCC-ADVOCATE, TADEPALLIGUDEM, W.G.DISTRICT. HINDU, MALE, AGE-46 R/0. RAMARAOPETA, YEARS, ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, REP BY ITS PUBLIC HIGH COURT OF A.P. AMARAVATHI. VEERAVALLI P.S., KRISHNA DISTRICT PROSECUTOR, RESPONDENT 2.YELLAIAH CHOWDARY SADINENI, S/0. SEETHARAMAIAH, MALE, AGE-60 YEARS, OCC-A.E, HOUSING UNGUTUR MANDAL, RO. FLAT NO.401, BLOCK NO.3, ROYAL LUXUARY APARTMENTS, ROAD NO.2, GANESH NAGAR, SRI RAMACHANDRA NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA-520008. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S); Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.P VIVEK Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1.PEDDIBHOTLA VENKATA SAI RAJESH 2.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court Made the Following Order: The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short “Cr.P.C.”) has been filed, by the petitioner, seeking quashment of the proceedings against him in C.C.No.6 of 2024 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nuzvid, for the offence under Sections 171(H) and 188 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’). 2. Heard Sri P.Vivek, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.D.Prasanna Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and acceded to by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor that the State. subject matter of this Criminal Petition is squarely covered by the Order passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.459 of 2020, dated 09.11.2023, wherein this Court held as follows. 10. It IS apt to mention that there is a statutory bar under Section 194 (1) (a) (1) Cr.P.c. to take cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 188 of IPC basing the charge sheet It is beneficial to extract Section (a) (1) of Cr.P.c. on 195 (1) “Section 195(1) in Th^ Code Of Criminal Procedure. 1978 (1) No Court shall take cognizance- (a) (i) of any offence punishable under sections 172 to 188 (both inclusive) of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), or (li) of any abetment of, or attempt to commit such offence, or (Hi) of any criminal conspiracy to commit such offence, except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate; (b) (i) of any offence punishable under any of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ), namely, sections 193 to 196 (both inclusive), 199, 200, 205 to 211 (both inclusive) and 228, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in, or In relation to, any proceeding in any Court, or (li) of any offence described in section 463, or punishable under section 471, section 475 or section 476, of the said Code, when such offence Is alleged to have been committed respect of a document produced or given in evidence In a proceeding In any Court, or in (Hi) of any criminal conspiracy to commit, or attempt to commit, or the abetment of, any offence specified in sub- clause (I) or sub clause (ii), except on the complaint In writing of that Court, or of some other Court to which that Court is subordinate. ” 11. ” 11. In the light of the language employed in the legal provisions referred supra, it Is vivid that there is a clear bar under Section 195 (1) (a) (1) of Cr.P.C. for taking cognizance of any offences punishable under Sections 172 to 188 of IPC, except on the comiplaint, in writing, of the Public Servant concerned or of some other Public Servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. At this juncture. It is relevant to understand what is complaint as per the Criminal Procedure Code. Section 2 (d) of Cr.P.C. is hereby extracted for quick reference: “(d) " complaint" means any allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate, with a view to his taking action under this Code, that some person, whether known or unknown, has committed an offence, but does not include a police report. Explanation.- A report made by a police officer in a case which discloses, after Investigation, the commission of a non- cognizable offence shall be deemed to be a complaint; and the police officer by whom such report is made shall be deemed to be the complainant;” 12. Admittedly, in the present case, without there being a complaint by the authority concerned, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 188 of IPC basing on a charge sheet filed by the police, which is in utter violation of Section 195 1 (a) (1) of Cr.P.C. In catena of decisions, a coordinate bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.4633 of 2023, Crl.P.No.5323 of 2009, 3670 of 2013, 8597 of 2018 and 9236 of 2018 clearly held that the Police are not empowered to investigate into the offence punishable under Section 188 of IPC and file charge sheet basing on a police report. In the case on hand, since the Court has taken cognizance of the offence based on the charge sheet filed by the Police, the procedure adopted Is not in accordance with law, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner for the offence under Section 188 of IPC would amount of abuse of process of the Court." 13. 4. Insofar as the offence punishable under Section 171-H a non-cognizable one and Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C., contemplates that no police officer shall investigate IPC is concerned, it is a non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial. It IS obligatory on the part of the police officer that commencing the investigation, he has to obtain jurisdictional Magistrate. before permission from the It is mandatory for the police officer Admittedly, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, to do so. on instructions, submitted any permission from the Magistrate in that the police officer has not obtained order to investigate into the without obtaining any permission from the jurisdictional investigation and filed charge sheet against the petitioner herein. In the present case, the police officer, ? Magistrate, conducted case In that view and in view of the Order passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No. 459 of 2020, dated 09.11.2023, this Court is of the view that, continuation of the impugned proceedings against the petitioner for the offences 171-H and 188 IPC, is nothing but an abuse of process of Court. 5. In such circumstances, this criminal petition is allowed by quashing the proceedings against the petitioner/accused in C.C.No.6 of 2024 the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sections 171 (H) and 188 of the Indian Penal under Sections on the file of Nuzvid, for the offence under Code. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed Sd/- K J RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTIO t^F FFICER To, 1. Judicial First Class Magistrate At Nuzvid it 2. One CC to SRI. P VIVEK, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRI. PEDDIBHOTLA VENKATA SAI RAJESH, Advocate [OPUC] 4. TWO CC to THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Advocate [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies NSR nm HIGH COURT DATED: 13/08/2025 ORDER CRLP NO. 3341 OF 2024 V (I 03 SEP 2025 S to, . ^ Current Section , CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED.