Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41322 (AP)

Sheik Madina Basha v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

CRLP/12017/2025 · 2025-11-19

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Dr.VJP,J Crl.P.No.12017 of 2025 APHC010555692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12017 OF 2025 Between: 1. Sheik Madina Basha, S/o. Late Khaja Meera, Mohiddin, aged 59 years, R/o. D.No. 67-19-lA, Anajaneya Swamy Temple, Near Nagamallithota, Junction, Kakinada. 2. Asha Bhanu, W/o. Sheik Madina Basha, aged 51 years, R/o. D.No. 67-19- lA, Anajaneya Swamy Temple, Near Nagamallithota, Junction, Kakinada. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Amaravathi, AP. 2. Salma Begum, W/o. Abdul Sheriff, Aged about 51 years, R/o. D.No. 67-19- lA, Road No.5, Nagamallithota Colony, Kakinada, Now at Hyderabad, Telangana State.(LWl ...Respondents Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtmay be pleased to quash the proceedings in order dt. 15-04-2025 made in CrI.M.P.No. 2549 of 2025 in CC.No. 670 of Dr.VJP,J Crl.P.No.12017 of 2025 2021 on the file of the special Mobile Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kakinada, East Godavari district., and pass such Counsel for the Petitioners: Reddy venkata ramana,REDDY VENKATA RAMANA Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Dr.VJP,J Crl.P.No.12017 of 2025 The Court made the following ORDER: 1. This Criminal Petition is filed with the following prayer: “…to quash the proceedings in order dt. 15-04-2025 made in CrI.M.P.No. 2549 of 2025 in CC.No. 670 of 2021 on the file of the special Mobile Judicial 1st Class Magistrate, Kakinada, East Godavari district..” 2. Heard Sri Venkata Ramana Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that petitioners are facing trial in C.C.No.670 of 2021 on the file of learned Special Mobile Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada for the offence under Sections 448, 427, 506 read with 34 IPC. Learned counsel would further submit that they have filed Crl.M.P.No.2549 of 2025 under Section 311 CrPC to recall PW.1 for further cross-examination on the new facts brought to their notice. The said application was dismissed. 4. Aggrieved thereby, petitioners preferred the present petition seeking quashment of said order. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the prayer stating that the learned trial Judge has given brief reasons on which the said application was dismissed. The petitioners on several occasions took adjournment for cross-examination of PW.1. When the cross of PW.2 was treated as nil, a petition under section 311 CrPC is filed for recalling PW.1 for further cross-examination and the same was allowed on payment Dr.VJP,J Crl.P.No.12017 of 2025 of costs but the petitioners again sought for adjournment. At that stage, the further cross-examination of PW.1 is treated as nil. After examination of PW.3, again another petition was filed to recall PW.1 for further cross- examination. As such, the petitioners consecutively filed petitions for recall of PW.1 but failed to utilize the opportunity. Similar is the case for other witnesses also. The learned trial Judge clearly mentioned about the conduct of the petitioners and rightly dismissed the petition and there are no grounds for quashment. 6. Considering the submissions made and on fair look at the impugned order placed before this Court, the order passed by the learned trial Court is well reasoned order. Learned trial Court rightly dismissed the petition in the light of several factors mentioned in the petition regarding the conduct of the accused in proceeding with the matter at every stage for every witness. 7. In the above view, there are absolutely no grounds warranting interference of this Court. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 20.11.2025 Dvs Dr.VJP,J Crl.P.No.12017 of 2025 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA 135 CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12017 OF 2025 Date: 20.11.2025 Dvs