APHC010016632024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 225/2024 Between: 1. MUSALOJI ANASUYAMMA, W/O. ANGADISREIMADHUDU, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC MEDICAL OFFICER, PHC, KHAJIPETA, R/O.DOOR NO.97/133-2, SANTHI NAGAR, UTUKURU, Y.S.R.DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI. 2. BADIGINCHALA VENKATA CHAITANYA MARUTHI, S/O.SUBRAMANYAM, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. DOOR NO.5/38, VIJAYANAGARAM STREET, PRODDATUR, Y.S.R.DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. P V N KIRAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2. V NITESH 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 225/2024 ORDER: The instant criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C)/under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused, seeking quashment of the Order dated 14.11.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate, Proddatur, YSR Kadapa District in Crl.M.P.No.1713 of 2023 in C.C.No.523 of 2017. 2. Heard Sri P.V.N.Kiran Kumar, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Sri V.Nitesh, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the accused facing trial in C.C.No.523 of 2017 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. He would further submit that the petitioner/accused filed a petition under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., seeking to recall the PW1 for further cross examination, since the learned counsel on record before the Trial Court forgot to put some crucial questions regarding Ex.P2 and Ex.P3 during the cross examination of PW1. But the said petition was dismissed vide Order dated 14.11.2023. He finally prays that the petitioner may be given an opportunity to prosecute the matter. 3 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that the learned Judge has rightly dismissed the petition since, the learned counsel for the accused cross examined PW1 at length on different occasions. 5. Considering the submissions and a fair look at impugned order and the material placed on record, as rightly put by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2, the learned Judge has clearly observed that the learned counsel for the accused cross examined PW1 at length on different occasions i.e., on 03.02.2023, 24.03.2023 and 18.05.2023. The impugned Order is a well reasoned Order. There are no grounds to interfere in the said Order by exercising the inherent jurisdiction and accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 17.09.2025 UPS 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 225/2024 Dated.17.09.2025 UPS 113