APHC010385082023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5728 OF 2023 Between; Veeramsetti Bhanu Prasad, S/o Papa Rao, aged 24 years Gongallamudi Village, Anamanapudi, Nandivada Mandal, Krishna District. R/o. 1-14, ...Petitioner/Accused AND 1. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by it's Public Prosecutor, High court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi ...Respondent/Complainant 2. Neelam Jyothi, W/o. Tera Syam Prasad, Aged about 26 Years, Prathipadu Village, Mandavalli Mandal, Krishna District ...Respondent/Defacto Complainant Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for records in CC.No.544/202Ion the file of Honourable n Court. Judicial First-Class Magistrate, Kaikaluru, Cum Junior Civil Judges Court, Kaikalur Krishna District. lA NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to direct stay all further proceedings including appearan6e of the petitioner in CC.No.544/2021 the file of Honourable Court Judicial First-Class Magistrate, Kaikaluru, Cum Junior Civil Judges Court, Kaikaluru, Krishna District. ^.Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T NAGARJUNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following order: APHC010385082023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5728/2023 [3457] Between: 1.VEERAMSETTI BHANU PRASAD, S/0 PAPA RAO AGED 24 YEARS, ANAMANAPUDI DISTRICT. R/0. 1-14, GONGALLAMUDI VILLAGE, NANDIVADA MANDAL, KRISHNA ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY IT'S PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI 2.NEELAM JYOTHI, W/0. TERA SYAM PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, PRATHIPADU VILLAGE, MANDAVALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA 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 of Criminal Petition, the High Courtmay be pleased to call for records in CC.No. 544/2021 on the file of Honourable Memorandum of Grounds Cot. Judicial First-Class Magistrate, Kaikaluru, Cum Junior Civil Judges Court, Kaikalur Krishna District, and quash lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 direct dispense with filing of the certified copy of chargesheet in CC.Nto. 544/2021 on tl file of Honourable Court Judicial First-Class Magistrate, Kaikaluru, Cum Junior Civil Judge Court, Kaikaluru, Krishna District. 7 lA NO: 2 OF 2023 / 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 direct stay all further proceedings including appearanSe of the petitioner in CC.No. 544/2021 the file of Honourable Court Judicial First-Class Magistrate, Kaikaluru, Cum Junior Ci Judges Court, Kaikaluru, Krishna District, pending disposal of the CRLP. No. 2023, before this Honourable Court. Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.T NAGARJUNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following; 7 ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.2 in C.C. No.544 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kaikaluru, for the alleged offences under Sections 341 and 354A read with Section 34 of the IPC. It is submitted that the petitioner is working as a Village Revenue Officer (VRO), and the 2nd respondent is working as a Village Revenue Assistant (VRA). The 2nd respondent filed a complaint alleging sexual harassment at the workplace by the Deputy Tahsildar, who is arraigned as Accused No.1. The only allegation against the petitioner is that, upon being informed by the 2nd respondent about the harassment by the Deputy Tahsildar, he allegedly suggested that she follow the directions of the Deputy Tahsildar in order to avoid further harassment. 2. Learned counsel further submits that, even as per the complaint, the 2nd respondent primarily sought action against Accused No.1, and there is no specific grievance raised against the petitioner. During the course of investigation, the police recorded the statements of as many as seven witnesses, apart from the Revenue Inspector and the Investigating Officer. The listed witnesses include LW1 (the 2nd 3. respondent), LW2 (her husband), LW3 (her mother), LW4, LW5, and LW6 (employees of the MRO Office), and LW7 (the Tahsildar of Mandavalli Mandal). It is also submitted that the statement of LW8 indicates that the issue of harassment was brought to his notice, and he suggested that the 2nd respondent lodge a complaint with the concerned Tahsildar. Subsequently, he was informed that a complaint was indeed filed by the 2nd respondent against the Deputy Tahsildar and the petitioner. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the 1st respondent-State. Perused the material available on record. 5. 6. Admittedly, the only allegation against the petitioner is that he suggested the 2nd respondent to comply with the Deputy Tahsildar’s directions. In the absence of any specific allegation attracting the offences under Sections 354A, 341 read with 34 of the IPC, subjecting the petitioner to trial would not be justified. It would be inappropriate to continue proceedings against the petitioner for offences which, prima facie, are not made out on the basis of the facts and circumstances of the case. None of the listed witnesses spoke about the commission of the alleged offences by the petitioner. 7. In view of the above, this Court is inclined to allow the petition. 8. Accordingly, C.C. No.544 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kaikaluru, insofar as it relates to the petitioner, is hereby quashed. 7 r M '/ Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Calendar 9. Case is of the year 2021. Hence, the learned Magistrate is directed to expedite the trial against the remaining accused. With the above observations, this Criminal Petition is allowed. 10. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR f ^ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER io 1. The Judicial First-Class Magistrate, Kaikaluru, Cum Junior Civil Judge Kaikaluru, Krishna District. 2. The Station House Officer Mandavalli Police Station Krishna District. 3. One CC to Sri.T Nagarjuna Reddy Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati [OUT] 5. Two CD Copies vna T HIGH COURT DATED:09/07/2025 \ i 3 1 JUL 2025 ^ Current Section , ^ ORDER CRLP NO. 5728 OF 2023 m ALLOWING THE CRLP