IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5279 OF 2025 Between: Atiuri Bhavani Prasad, S/o Rajendra Prasad, aged 45 years, R/o D.No.8-3- 318/10, Teachers Colony, Gudivada, Krishna District, Native of Pulaparru. ...PETITIONER/REVISION PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT AND 1. Doppalapudi Venkata Krishna Chowdary, S/o Venkateswara Rao, aged about 45 years, R/o Pothunuru yillage, Gundugolanu Mandal, West ? Godavari District. (Accused) 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. I ...RESPONDENTS r-5 Petition under Section; .528. of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, pe High Court may be pleased ot quash the order dated: 27.02.2025 in pRL.R.P. No; 22 of 2019 on the file of Hon'ble XI Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Gudivada. being in abuse of process of law and Court I.A. NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section/a4:82 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the order dated: 27.02.2025 in r- ‘>1 CRL.R.P No; 22 of 2019 on,the file of Hon'ble XI Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Gudivada, pending disposal of the main criminal petition This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri G RAMA KRISHNA, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.2 The Court made the follov\ring: Order .f V 5 i I APHC010249592025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5279/2025 Between: Atiuri Bhavani Prasad ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND Doppalapudi Venkata Krishna Chowdary and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. GRAMA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2. The Court made the following Order: 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 passed by the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gudivada, whereby the learned Sessions Judge declined to interfere in the order passed by the learned Magistrate in CrI.M.P. No. 426£if.2017 dated 05.03.2019. The petitioner has filed a cpiTiplajj:;^urLdeji- 2 Section 138 of the N.l. Act against the 1®* respondent. The complaint with a delay of about 107 days. Along with the complaint, the CrI.M.P. No. 426 of 2017 seeking condonation of the 107-day delay. The grounds for seeking condonation of delay petitioner are as follows: was filed petitioner filed per the petition filed by the as Ground No. 1: The record was misplaced in the office of the counsel for the petitioner. Ground No. 2: The petitioner was suffering from typhoid and jaundice such, he could not file the complaint within the time. and as 3. The learned Magistrate issued the notice to the 1 St St respondent: the 1 respondent did not appear in the Court in spite of receipt of notice. After hearing the petitioner and perusing the record, the learned Magistrate dismissed the petition, expressing doubts on the medical certificate produced by the petitioner. The learned Magistrate has also observed that the petitioner is a resident of Gudivada. 4. However, the medical certificate produced from Kallapalem Eye Hospital, Kaikaluru, mentions that the petitioner suffered from jaundice and typhoid and was advised bed rest from 30.06.2017 to 15.10.2017. documents were submitted along with the medical certificate, case sheet, medical report, O.P. slip, etc. As such, the learned doubted the medical certificate submitted by the petitioner. No other such as the Magistrate 3 5. That apart, there was no reason assigned in the complaint for filing the complaint with a delay of 107 days. On these grounds, the learned Magistrate dismissed the petition. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed CrI.R.P. No. 22 of 2019, which was also dismissed by the XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gudivada, vide order dated 27.02.2025. t 6. After perusing the record and the order passed by the learned Magistrate, as well as the order passed by the learned XI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gudivada, this Court is in concurrence with the view taken by the learned Magistrate. Section 142(1) deals with the condonation of delay, and without substantial reasons, the delay cannot be condoned. 7. Considering the legal possession and the well-reasoned order passed by the learned Magistrate, this Court is not inclined to interfere. 8. Accordingly, this.Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, sh^stand closed. Sd/- M PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR A/TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The XI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Gudivada 2. The Principal District & Sessipps Judge, Krishna, at Machilipatnam 3. The Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Gudivada 4. One CC to SRI G RAMA KRISHNA Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. Three CD Copies gsg HIGH COURT DATED: 08/05/2025 ORDER CRLP.No.5279 of 2025 Of*NDH^ X U SEP 2025 ^ Current Section DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION