1 APHC010432062025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8724/2025 Between: KORUKONDA SIVA RAMA KRISHNA, S/O.LAKSHMI NARAYANA, AGED 28 YRS, R/O OF VIKAS NAGAR,NEAR MASJID, GUDIYADI,RAYAPUR, CHATHISGHAD STATE. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH S.H.O.PATAMATA POLICE STATION), REP BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI) ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SALEHA BASHA SHAIK Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition under Section 528 of BNSS has been filed, by the Petitioners / Accused No.1, seeking to quash the proceedings against him in Sessions Case No.159 of 2024 on the file of the Court of Mahila Sessions Judge, Vijayawada for the offences under Section 370 (A) (2) of IPC and Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act. 2. Heard Sri Shaik Saleha Basha, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for State. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner herein is only a customer and is not an organizer. It is further submitted that 2 there are no ingredients to attract the alleged offences against the Petitioner. Learned counsel would further submit that there are no criminal antecedents against the Petitioner. 4. Per contra, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor brought to the notice of the Court that, in the Common Reference Order dated 31.10.2025 passed in Crl.P.Nos.8675 of 2022 and batch, the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, had categorically held that the customer can also be prosecuted under Section 370A of IPC, in the even the facts prima facie disclose the alleged offence. 5. Having considered the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of the view that the contention of the Petitioner that he is merely a customer and therefore cannot be prosecuted, cannot be accepted in view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon’ble Division Bench referred to above. When the law has been clearly laid down that a customer can also be prosecuted under Section 370A IPC, and in view of the allegations prima facie to attract the said provision against the Petitioner, this Court is not inclined to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS. The petition lacks merit and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:20.11.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.8724 of 2025 Dt.20.11.2025 Dinesh