1 APHC010307682020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4946/2020 Between: 1. VANKAYALAPATI PRASANNA BHARGAVI, W/O ASHOK BABU, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, 2. VANKAYALAPATI ASHOK BABU, S/O NAGAIAH NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/O POOLATHOTA VILLAGE, DORAVARI SATRAM MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF A P, THROUGH ITS P.P. HIGH COURT OF A.P. AT AMARAVATHI. 2. THE MANDAL EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE AND TAHSILDAR, DORAVARISATRAM MANDAL, DORAVARISATRAM, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 3. PODILI MADHAVI, W/O LATE SUBRAMANYAM NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O 16-8-264, RAMALINGAPURAM MAIN ROAD, NELLORE TOWN, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to Quash the proceedings Rc.NO.B/351/2020 dated 5-9-2020 passed by the Mandal Executive 2 Magistrate and Tahsildar, Doravarisatram Mandal, SPSR Nellore District and pass such other order or orders. IA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further Proceedings Rc.No.B/351/2020 dated 5-9-2020 passed by the Mandal Executive Magistrate and Tahsildar, Doravarisatram mandal, SPSR Nellore District, Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. P GANGA RAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER : Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the petition may be disposed of by making the interim order as absolute. 2. Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State is in attendance. 3. For ready reference, the interim order dated 11.11.2020 passed by this Court in I.A.No.1 of 2020, is extracted hereunder: “As per the impugned order dated 05-09-2020, an order under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. was issued by the learned Mandal Executive Magistrate and Tahsildar, Doravarisatram restraining the petitioners herein along with others from entering the lands in question. The said order is now mainly assailed on the ground that the learned Magistrate did not record his satisfaction as required under Section 145(1) of Cr.P.C. to issue any such proceedings restraining the parties from entering the land in question and also on the ground the learned Magistrate did not 3 give any notice to the parties to appear before him in connection with the enquiry of the said petition. In support of the contention of the petitioners, learned counsel for the petitioners also relied on the reported Judgment of this Court in the case of Shaik Liyaqat and others v. State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad and another1, wherein this Court held that the essential requirements to issue an order under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. is to record the satisfaction of the learned Executive Magistrate regarding the grounds to initiate such proceedings and to give notice to the parties to appear before the Court either in person or by Pleader and as the requirements are not complied with which are mandatory in nature, that the said proceedings are liable to be quashed. Therefore, the petitioners could prima facie make out the case warranting interference of this Court which requires examination in the main criminal petition. As the learned Magistrate did not record his satisfaction in issuing the said proceedings and only issued the said proceedings purely on the basis of the recommendation of the District Collector and as the learned Magistrate did not issue any notice to the parties to appear before him as required under Section 145(1) of Cr.P.C., there shall be an interim suspension of the impugned order, till the next date of hearing.” 4. In that view of the matter, the Criminal Petition is disposed of and the interim order passed by this Court is hereby made absolute. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 21.07.2025 ARR 1 2017 (1) ALT (Crl.) 312 (A.P.) 4 310 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4946/2020 Dt. 21.07.2025 ARR