APHC010447052025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Saturday, the thirtieth The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Criminal Between: M.Sreenivasulu The State of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the petitioner: 1. Srinivasulu Kurra Counsel for the respondents: NIL The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) thirtieth day of August two thousand and twenty five Present The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Criminal Petition No: 8830 of 2025 ...Petitioner/accused and The State of Andhra Pradesh and others ...2nd respondent/informant Counsel for the petitioner: Counsel for the respondents: The Court made the following: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3311] day of August two thousand and twenty five /accused informant 2 Crl.P.No.8830 of 2025 O R D E R: This criminal petition is filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. to quash the proceedings against the petitioner / accused in Crime No.86 of 2025 of Tirumala II town Police Station, Tirupati District, for offences under Sections 196(1), 351(2), 353(1), 356(1), 356(2) of B.N.S. 2. The case of the petitioner / accused is briefly as follows: F.I.R. was registered on 19.08.2025 on a complaint said to have been presented on 03.08.2025 alleging that the petitioner / accused, journalist running a newspaper by title ‘Tirupati Vartha’, has been criminally intimidating and blackmailing the Chairman, T.T.D. and office staff by demanding allotment of darshan tickets out of the proper procedure, regularization of his unauthorized hawker licence and had threatened that if his demands were not met, he would publish false and defamatory news items against the Chairman, T.T.D. and T.T.D. and so his acts amount to criminal intimidation, defamation, extortion and blackmail with an intention to malign the reputation of the Chairman and cause damage to the image of T.T.D. 3. Ms. K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent No.1, submitted that Section 35(3) of B.N.S.S. would be followed as the offences covered by the F.I.R. are within the scope of it. 4. As such, the learned counsel for the petitioner requested to dispose of the criminal petition recording the same. 5. In the result, the petition is disposed of directing the Station House Officer concerned to follow Section 35(3) of the B.N.S.S. 3 Crl.P.No.8830 of 2025 There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ B. S. BHANUMATHI, J Dt.30.08.2025 PNV