APHC010348012025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7217/2025 Between: 1. L. JAGAPATHI BABU, S/O L. SAMBASIVA NAIDU AGED ABOUT 39YEARS, R/O 1-20, BOMMASAMUDRAM VILLAGE, IRALA MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT 2. L. VIVEK, S/O L. SAMBASIVA NAIDU AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O 1-20, BOMMASAMUDRAM VILLAGE, IRALA MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT 3. L. SAMBASIVA NAIDU, S/O PEDDABBA NAIDU AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O 1-20, BOMMASAMUDRAM VILLAGE, IRALA MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT 4. L.CHILAKAMMA, W/O L. SAMBASIVA NAIDU AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O 1-20, BOMMASAMUDRAM VILLAGE, IRALA MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT 5. D.GNANARAJU, S/O K.DEVARAJU, AGED 30 YEAR, 2-151, CMT ROAD, KONGAREDDYPALLY CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 6. A. MURALI, S/O A.ANAND AGED 27 YEARS, R/ 22-1349, SRINIVASA NAGAR, KATTAMNCHI, CHITTOOR CHITTOOR DISTRICT 7. SHASI @ PRABHU, S/O RAVI, AGED 25 YEARS R/ O VENGALRAO COLONY KONGAREDDYPALLY, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 8. S.MUNIKESHAVA, S/O MURALI RAJU AGED 28 YEARS R/O RAGIMANIPENTA VILLAGE BANGARUPALEM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI. 2. P PAVAN KUMAR, S/O LATE P.BHASKAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC PRIVATE EMPLOYEE R/O 44, BOMMASAMUDRAM VILLAGE, IRALA MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): 2 Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. HARINADH NIDAMANURI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. KAPPERA PAVAN KALYAN 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court Made the Following Order: The instant Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, by the Petitioners herein, to quash the proceedings in Crime No.29 of 2025 of Kanipakam Police Station, Chittoor District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 118(1), 115(2), 329(3), 324(2), 351(2) read with 190 BNS. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent No.1/State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petition may be disposed of by giving protection to the petitioners vide guidelines of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar1. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the offences registered against the petitioners are punishable with less than seven years period of imprisonment and necessary direction may be given to the concerned Station House Officer. 5. Considering the submissions, this criminal petition is disposed of with the following; 1 (2014) 8 SCC 273 3 a. Investigating Officer is at liberty to complete the investigation, in accordance with law. b. In the event of any coercive action sought to be taken against the petitioners, concerned police authorities are directed to scrupulously follow the procedure prescribed under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar’s case (supra). 6. It goes without saying that, if any charge sheet is filed in the above crime, the petitioners are at liberty to challenge the charge sheet, if they feels aggrieved by the same. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall stands closed. __________________________________________ Dr. VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 06.08.2025 Asr 4 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.7217 of 2025 Dt.06.08.2025 Asr