Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2748 (AP)

PAGADALA HARIBABU v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

CRLP/286/2025 · 2025-01-09

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010007572025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 286/2025 Between: Pagadala Haribabu and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 10, seeking quashment of the proceedings in Crime No.126 of 2024, on the file of Pellakur Police Station, Pellakur Mandal, Tirupathi District against them for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 292, 324(2), 285, 49 r/w 3(5) BNS, 2023. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petition may be disposed of by giving protection to the petitioner vide guidelines of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar1. 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the offence registered against the petitioners is 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; 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 BNSS 1 (2014) 8 SCC 273 3 [Section 41-A Cr.P.C.,] 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 feel aggrieved by the same. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall stands closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 09.01.2025 MH 4 74 HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.286 of 2025 Dt.09.01.2025 MH