\ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5651 OF 2n?fi Between: Pallala Yerram Reddy, S/o Bale Reddy, Male, Age 46 years. Teacher (AHS, Gurthedu), R/o Perikavalasa Village, Ramavaram Mandal, Alluri Sitharamaraju District. Chinthalapudi Post, Y. ...Petitioner/Accused AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Public Court Of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. Prosecutor, High 2. Gorle Bhushanam (De-Facto Complainant), S/o Durgayya, Age 67 Gurthedu Village, Y. years, R/o D.No.1-38, Ramalayam Street, Ramavaram Mandal, Alluri Sitharamaraju District ...Respondents Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds the High Court may be pleased to of Criminal Petition quash the Docket order Dt. 28-03-2025 passed by the court below In CrI.M.P. 587 of 2025 in CC 78 of 2023 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First class, Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District. I.A. NO: 1 OF 2n?fi Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further Petition proceedings including the appearance of the Petitioner/ Accused in CC 78 of 2023 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First class, Rampachodavaram East Godavari District pending disposal of the above criminal petition. This Petition coming on for hearing upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Kotha Naga Surya Rao, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (AP) on behalf of the Respondent No.1. The Court made the following :Order / APHC010261272025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) B [3457] TUESDAY .THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5651/2025 Between: Pallala Yerram Reddy ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. KOTHA NAGA SURYA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant{S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 The Court made the following Order: Heard learned Prosecutor appearing for the State. Learned counsel for the challenging the order passed on the file of Judicial Magistrate counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public 2. petitioner submits that the petitioner is in Crl.M.P.No.587 of 2025 in C.C.No.78 of 2023 of First Class, Rampachodava petitioner is facing trial in C.C,No.78 of 2023 for the ram. The alleged offences under Section 138 of N.I. Act. 3. Learned counsel for the a petition seeking petitioner submits that the de-facto appointment of Advocate recording his evidence. It is stated in the order that the complainant has filed Commissioner for de-facto complainant was bed-ridden and evidence by the Advocate Commissioner as such, a petition for recording his was filed. 4. Learned counsel for the Magistrate ought to have i passing an order allowing the CrI.M.P. the learned counsel the same was also recorded. petitioner submits that the learned issued notice to the petitioner before unilaterally It is submitted that on the same date, appearing for the petitioner had aigiven up his vakalat and 5. Considering the submissions and learned Assistant Public of learned counsel for the petitioner point for consideration is Magistrate appointing an Advocate Court?” Prosecutor, the whether the order passed by the learned Commissioner can be interfered with by this % . 3 i 6. The impugned order which is under challenge is passed by the learned Magistrate for recording the evidence. For adopting the procedure of recording of evidence, the petitioner should not have any objection. The recording of evidence through an Advocate Commissioner in a case where the petitioner is bed-ridden cannot be disputed or challenged. It is for the petitioner to raise all grounds on merits before the Advocate Commissioner during the course of cross-examination of the complainant. 7. On these grounds, this Court is not inclined to interfere in this matter and accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. 8. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if ajiy, shall stand closed. Sd/- G HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District 2. One CC to Sri. Kotha Naga Surya Rao, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to The Public Prosecutor, Fligh Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 4. Three CD Copies. To. MKP sree 1, \ HIGH COURT DATED : 17/06/2025 S. \ ORDER CRLP.No.5651 of 2025 DISMISSING THE CRLP