APHC010454142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI SMS KS H.lfS MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9097 OF 2025 Between: D.Gowri Shankar, S/o.Late D.Subramanyam, Aged Advocate, R/o.Flat No.404, H.No. 16-11-740/3/4, Gaddinavaram Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad 57 years, Occ: ...Petitioner/AccusedNo.7 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through Station House Officer, Ongole Taluk Police Station, Ongole, Prakasam District. Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Padesh, At Amaravathi. Rep. by its Public ...Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash all further proceedings against the petitioner/ Accused No.7 in P.R.C. No.5 of 2016 (arising out of Crime No.355 Ongole Taluk Police Station, Prakasam District), pending before the Court of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole, Prakasam District, in of 2014 of view of the clean acquittal of the co-accused in Sessions Case No. 164 of 2016. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS R/W 72 (2) BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in P.R.C. No.5 of 2016 (arising out of Crime No.355 of 2014 of Ongole Taluk Police Station, Prakasam District), pending before the Court of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole, Prakasam District, including execution of NBW against the petitioner/ Accused No.7 pending disposal of the above criminal petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri N.Ravi Prasad, Advocate Counsel for the Respondent: The Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. The Court made the following order: APHC010454142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) SMS [3396] MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9097/2025 Between: 1.D GOWRI SHANKAR, S/O.LATE D.SUBRAMANYAM AGED 57 YEARS, OCC ADVOCATE R/0 FLAT NO.404, H.NO. 16-11- 740/3/4, GADDINAVARAM, DILSUKHNAGAR, HYDERABAD ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Padesh, At Amaravathi. Through the SHO, Ongole Taluk Police Station Ongole, Prakasam District ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. N RAVI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court Made the Following Order: The instant petition under Section 528 of BNSS, has been filed by the petitioner herein/Accused No.7, seeking quashment of proceedings against him in PRC No.5 of 2016 on the file of the Court of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole, for the offences under Section 120(b), 302, 394 and 201 read with 34 IPC. Heard Sri N.Ravi Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi respondent/state. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein is A7, and the case against him hashben split up as PRC No. 5 of 2. learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for 3. 2 2016, which is pending before the learned III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole. Learned counsel would further submit that, in the very same case, S.C. No. 164 of 2016 against A1 to A6 ended in acquittal for lack of evidence of prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. It is further submitted that the judgment in S.C. No. 164 of 2016 clearly shows that the key witnesses, PW1 and PW2, did not support the prosecution’s case, and nothing was elicited during their examination to establish the guilt of the similar lines, the allegations made against the petitioner herein/A7 identical, and hence, he is also entitled to acquittal in the said 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor accused. In are case. would suomit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 5. In the light of the judgment in SC No. 164 of 2016 acquitting A1 to A6 which shows that the PW1 and PW2 who are said to be material witnesses turned hostile to the prosecution case and denied having stated before police as in Ex.P1 and P2 and further PW3 and PW4 are also said to be material witnesses also turned hostile, of any cogent and corroborating evidence from the material witnesses, the alleged allegations cannot prove the guilt of the accused, of the judgment passed against A1 to A6, the petitioner herein/A7 under same footing and liable to be acquitted. who In the absence In the light comes 3 6. For the foregoing reasons, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings, in respect of petitioner/A7 in PRC No.5 of 2016 on the file of the Court of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole hereby quashed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. are Sd/- N NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 'i \ //TRUE COPY// 1 o/ SECTION OFFICER To. 1. The III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class District. 2. The Station House Officer, Ongole Taluk Police Prakasam District 3. One CC to Sri N.Ravi Prasad, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CC’s to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. [OUT] 5. Three CD Copies Ongole, Prakasam Station, Ongole GPC sree HIGH COURT DATED; 15/09/2025 ORDER CRLP NO. 9097 OF 2025 ALLOWING THIS CRIMINAL PETITION