IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N %' ■ CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4561 OF 2025 Between; Jampana Kumar Raju, JamfD^na Kumar Varma, S/o J. R. Raju, Aged about 47 years, R/o Dn,H No. ' 'fi 'I-'' ' '' ; Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. i 50-117-17/3, Seethammadhara ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.2 AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. 2. Shri S. Khageswara Rao, Sub-Inspector, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam City, Andhra Pradesh., - I ...respondent No.2 / DE-FACTO 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 the proceedings as against Petitioner/Accused No.2 in C.C. No./3288 of 2020 on the file of II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court,.-Visakhapatnam for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471 and 120-B r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 18 and 19 of the Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1995 '• .•} : f n: : •i I.A. NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section $2$ of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Merpprandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition' the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance of the Petitioner/Accused No.2 in C.C. No. 3288 of 2020 on the file of II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Visakhapatnam for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 468,471 and 120-B r/w Section 34 of I PC and Sections 18 and 19 of the Transplantation of Human Organs Act, 1995 ■ 4 ¥ . This Petition coming on for h^^^ upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition an|J upon hearing the arguments of Sri S.V.Maruti Sankar, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (AP) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 The Court made the following: i i i ‘■'i. !i f ■•-.2 ^ 3% ( >: t I ( "i. i x. . 1 CRLP. No.4561 of 2025 n APHC010213992025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3467] MONDAY,THE TWENTYEIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4561/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED Jampana Kumar Raju AND ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.SINGAMSETTY V.M. SANKAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: CRLP. No.4561 of 2025 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION No.4561 OF 2025 ORDER: 1. Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. This criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C. No.3288 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Visakhapatnam, for the alleged offences under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471 and 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 18 and 19 of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act [for short TOHO Act’]. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, under section 13 of the TOHO Act, a complaint can only be filed by the appropriate authority. The learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the order passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.3550 of 2022, where the victim filed the complaint, and based on the victim's complaint, the police investigated and filed a charge sheet. This Court, while considering the issue, examined the mandate under Section 13(2) of the TOHO Act and quashed the case insofar as the applicability of Sections 18 and 19 of the Act. 4. Upon perusal of the records in the present case, it appears that complaint has been filed by the appropriate authority. Instead, the I no .? y-^'- r. 3 CRLP. No.4561 of 2025 filed the complaint based on credible Investigating Officer has information received. 5. considering the submissions, it is evident that the Inspector of Police is competent authority under the provisions of the TOHO Act. 6. In light of the above, this Court is inclined to allow the criminal petition to the extent of the applicability of Sections 18 and 19 of the TOHO Act. shall face trial for the remaining offences with not a However, the petitioner which he has been charged in C.C. No.3288 of 2020 on the file of the of the II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. 7. Accordingly, the criminal petition is partly allowed. 8. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in Court this criminal petition shall stand closed. Sd /- A VENU GOPALA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUECOPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The II Additional Chief Metropplitan Magistrate Court, Visakhapatnam 2. The Station House Officer, Maharanipeta Police station, Visakhapatnam District 3. One CC to Sri S.V.Maruti Sankari Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi. [OUT] i 5. Three CD Copies ; MV TF HIGH COURT DATED: 28/04/2025 V,' i ■•-'I' I i': ■g? ANDH^ ORDER CRLP.No.4561 of 2025 cm S (irAUGOTS mu w o in ^ . Current Section ^ pesPATCVV^^ .J' :k . r I \ r i ALLOWING THE CRLP IN PART