./APHC010327912025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA P AT AMARAVATI / o m lO FA? ■ 0 FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY PRESENT honourable SRI JUSTICE HARINATH. CRIMINAL PETITION NO- Mny ne JULY FIVE N Between: Guduri Praveen Reddy, S/o. Thumagunta, Shameer Lakshina Reddy, Aged about peta, Hyderabad. Telangana. 36 years, R/o. ■..Petitioner/Accused No.3 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh of Andhra Pradesh, r Station, Darsi, Prakasam District. Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, Rep. by Special Enforcement High Court Bureau Police ■ Respondent No.1 Of Police Special Enforcement Bureau Police , The Station, Darsi, Prakasam District. -Respondent No.2/Defacto Complainant praying that in of Criminal Petition, on the file of Petition under Section 528 of BNSS/482 the circumstances stated i of Cr.P.C is filed in the Memorandum of Grounds may be pleased to quash the CC the Court of the Judicial Magistrate the High Court No. 1 of 2024 of First Class, Darsi. lA NO: 2 OF 2Q2fi Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further CC No. 1 of 2024 proceedings in the on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Darsi. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SHAIK MOHAMMED ISMAIL Counsel for the Respondent No.1: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Counsel for the Respondent No.2: — The Court made the following order: APHC010327912025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] FRIDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6807/2025 Between: 1.GUDURI PRAVEEN REDDY, S/0. LAKSHINA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/0. THUMAGUNTA, SHAMEER PETA, HYDERABAD TELANGANA. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Special Enforcement Bureau Police Station, Darsi Prakasam District. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT 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 Courtpleased to quash the CC No. 1 of 2024 the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Darsi and lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 pleased to dispense with the certified copy chargesheet in CC No. 1 of 2024 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Darsi and pass on pass 2 jA NO: 2 OF 90011 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of RMcjq oi^mstances stated in the Memoranda of Grounds ® High Court may be pleased pleased No. 1 of 2024, Darsi and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.SHAIK MOHAMMED ISMAIL Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR praying that in the of Criminal Petition,the proceedings in the CC Magistrate of First Class ^ to stay all further on the file of the Court of the Judicial !i^ U i 3 The Court made the following Order: The petitioner is seeking quash of the proceedings in C.C.No.1 of 2024 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dafrsi for the alleged offences under Section 34(a) of AP Excise Act, 1968 (for short ‘the Excise Act’). The petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 20.10.2020, the 2"^ respondent prepared a mediator report of the search conducted on Mounika Restaurant situated in Darsi at around 03.00PM. The 1®^ accused informed the respondents that the 2. source of supply of liquor bottles was the petitioner herein. The petitioner is alleged to have committed offence under Section 34(a) of the Excise Act. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant 3. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. Perused the material on record. It is mandatory for the Officer to follow the procedure under 4. Sections 54 or 55 of the Excise Act. Except for the statement that the petitioner was shown a search warrant, no other document is produced before this Court. The learned counsel places reliance on the judgment of this Court in Kola Sai Teja Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and others\ In the identical facts of the case, the coordinate bench of this 5. Court in Kola Sai Teja’s case referred to supra held that in the absence of recorded reasons substantiating the reasonable belief of the investigating officer that an offence under the Excise Act was being perpetrated, any search conducted without such justification is vitiated. Consequently, the continuation of criminal proceedings therein was held to be an abuse of the ^ 2025 see Online AP 1355 4 process of law, and the impugned proceedings therein were accordingly quashed. Following the judgment of a coordinate bench of this Court in 6. Kola Sal Teja’s case referred to supra, and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.1 of 2024 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Darsi, are hereby quashed. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand Sd/- B CHITTI JOSEPH assistant REGISTRAR 7. closed. //true copy// SECTION OFFICER To, of First Class, Darsi. Special Enforcement Judicial Magistrate 1. The 2. The Station Station, Darsi 3. One CC to Sri 4_ Two CCs to Amaravati. [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies Bureau Police House Officer i, Prakasam District. iShaik Mohammed Ismail, Advocate [OPUCl High Court of Andhra ' Pradesh at Public Prosecutor Chp vna HIGH COURT DATED:04/07/2025 ORDER CRLP NO. 6807 OF 2025 ^^OFAMoSiq^ 5 2 8 AUG 2025 m if Current Section . ^ ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION