APHC010334232025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6950/2025 Between: 1. BOLEM SRI HARSHA, S/O.BOLEM RAVI KUMAR AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.1-33, PEDA BAAVI CENTER, KANURU VILLAGE, PENAMALURU MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT. 2. BOLEM RAVI KUMAR, S/O.KOTESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.1-33, PEDA BAAVI CENTER, KANURU VILLAGE, PENAMAJURU MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT. 3. BOLEM SARADHA RANI, W/O.RAVI KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.1-33, PEDA BAAVI CENTER, KANURU VILLAGE, PENAMALURU MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT. 4. MADU SOBANESWARA RAO, S/O.VENKATA SUBBA RAO, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.1-58, PEDA BAAVI CENTER, KANURU VILLAGE, PENAMALURU MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AT 2 AMARAVATHI. 2. BOLEM SAI KIRAN, S/O.BOLEM RAVI KUMAR AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.1-33, PEDA BAAVI CENTER, KANURU VILLAGE, PENAMALURU MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT. (THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IS NOT NECESSARY PARTY TO THIS PETITION) ...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 Courtmay be pleased to call for the records relating to the C.C.No.5154/2019 on the file of the II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum- Mahila Magistrate (Juvenile Court), Vijayawada and consequently quash the order dated 19-04-2025 in Crl.MP.No.2839/2024 in C.C.No.5154/2019 on the file of the II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Mahila Magistrate (Juvenile Court), Vijayawada in the interest of justice. IA 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 may be pleased to dispense with the filing of the certified copy of the order dated 19- 04-2025 in Crl.MP.No.2839/2024 in C.C.No.5154/2019 on the file of the II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Mahila Magistrate (Juvenile Court), Vijayawada for time being period in the interest of Justice. IA NO: 2 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 may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No.5154/2019 on the file of the II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Mahila Magistrate (Juvenile Court), Vijayawada pending disposal of the above Crl.P. in the interest of Justice. 3 Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. P NAGENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 4 The Court made the following order: Petitioner, aggrieved by the orders passed in Crl.MP.No.2839 of 2024 in C.C.No.5154 of 2019 on the file of II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Mahila Magistrate (Juvenile Court), Vijayawada, filed the present Criminal Petition. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3. The prosecution filed a petition for receiving the documents i.e., the city scan reports/NCCT brain and MRI brain Screaming of P.Ws. 1 and 2 along with the photo copies of the Government Hospital OP slips of P.Ws 1 to 3 and 3D MACU report of the P.W.2. The prosecution filed another petition to examine the radiologist and that the examining the radiologist is mandatory in view of the charge against the petitioner under Section 326 of IPC. Considering the submissions and the documents, which are to be marked by the prosecution, learned Magistrate has allowed the petition. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that these documents could not be filed while the trial was underway and that the prosecution has come up with this petition at the time of final arguments and submits that no valid grounds were raised by prosecution for bringing in any additional documents on record. 5 4. The documents sought to be marked are related to the listed witness, these documents could not be marked for the reason best known to the investigating officer at that point of time. However, in the interest of justice, when the prosecution was coming forward to mark these documents, this Court finds no infirmity in the order passed by the learned Magistrate. As there is no valid ground raised by the petitioner warranting interference of this Court, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous application pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date: 08.07.2025 ANS 6 197 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6950/2025 Date: 08.07.2025 ANS