APHC010706502025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13404/2025 Between: 1. GINUPUDI PADMAVATHI, W/O. JAYARAJU BABU,AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,SENIOR ASSISTANCE, OLO. DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,PUBLIC HEALTH SUB-DIVISION, WEDNESDAY MARKET,BHIMAVARAM ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THONDARAPU SRINIVASU, S/O. RAMBABU,AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 15-68/1,GOLLALAMATTA VEEDHI, NEARAMG HOSPITAL,YELESWARAM. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PRACECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. B.SUDHAKAR KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2. 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13404 of 2025 Order: The Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNSS’), by the Petitioner/Accused, seeking quashment of the order dated 08.12.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.2521 of 2025 in C.C.No.140 of 2018 on the file of the learned III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rajamahendravaram. 2. Heard Sri B.Sudhakar Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ms.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent No.2/State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is facing trial for the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act and that his earlier counsel could not cross-examine PW1 regarding the service of notice, which was not properly effected in this matter. It is in those circumstances that the petitioner filed a petition to reopen and recall PW1 with respect to the service of notice, which is crucial in this matter. Learned counsel further would submit that a fair opportunity may be given to the petitioner to pursue his case. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 5. Considering the submissions made and upon a fair reading of the impugned order passed by the trial Court, this Court does not find any merit in 3 entertaining this petition, as the order passed by the trial Court is a well- reasoned one. In addition, when the matter was coming up for adjournment, this application was filed before the trial Court. 6. In that view of the matter, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. However, it is left open to the petitioner to raise her contentions before the trial Court, and the learned trial Judge may consider the same and take an appropriate decision over the matter in accordance with law. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 29.12.2025 Asr 4 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13404 of 2025 Date: 29.12.2025 Asr