APHC010239752024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3368] THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4609/2024 Between: Mohammad Shanvaz ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. M J SIVA RAMA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following order: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner herein under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to quash the order dated 08.08.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.609 of 2023 in C.C.No.49 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the Special Judge for Trial of SPE and ACB Cases, Rajamahendravaram. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein filed an application before the trial Court under Section 254(2) Cr.P.C., to issue summons and examine the proposed witnesses for the defense. Learned Special Judge dismissed the said application and refused the request of the petitioner. The proposed witness is Sri G.V.V.S.Murthy, the then Assistant Sub Inspector of Police of Pentapadu Police Station. On a perusal of the record, it would show that that at the time of impugned Post Trap Proceedings; the above proposed witness was working as Assistant Sub Inspector of Police in Pentapadu Police Station and provided some history sheet to the Trap Officer. The prosecution did not examine the proposed witness nor cited witness in the case. The accused intends to examine him as defense witness to speak about certain aspects occurred at the time of the Trap Proceedings, in support of his defense. 4. Perusal of the impugned order under challenge would disclose that the learned Special Judge did not consider the above circumstances and dismissed the said application. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order under challenge is liable to be set aside. 5. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed by setting aside the order dated 08.08.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.609 of 2023 in C.C.No.49 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the Special Judge for Trial of SPE and 3 ACB Cases, Rajamahendravaram. The petitioner/accused is permitted to examine the above proposed witness as a witness for the defence. The learned Special Judge is directed to fix a date for examination of above witness as defense witness and issue summons to the witness as per law. Prosecution before the learned Special Judge is at liberty to cross-examine the proposed witness, as per law. Examination of the proposed witness shall be completed by the learned Special Judge as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Prosecution as well as defense shall cooperate with the learned Special Judge for examination of the defense witness to conclude the proceedings of the case at an early date. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI Date: 06.02.2025 RMD/PSA 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI Criminal Petition No:4609 OF 2024 Date: 06.02.2025 RMD/PSA