APHC010558722025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10838/2025 Between: 1. RAGIPINDI NAGENDRA REDDY, S/O. RAMACHANDRA REDDY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURALIST VELPULA VILLAGE, VEMULA MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. RAGIPINDI RAGHUNATHA REDDY, S/O GOPAL REDDY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC- AGRICULTURALIST VELPULA VILLAGE, VEMULA MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): 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 Court pleased to quash the order CrI.M.P.No.317 of 2024 in S.C. No. 100 of 2022, on the file of the Additional Assistant Session Judge, Kadapa, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 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 Court may be pleased to dispense with filing of the original certified copy order CrI.M.P. No. 317 of 2024 in S.C. No. 100 of 2022 on the file of the 2 Additional Assistant Session Judge, Kadapa before this Hon’ble Court and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 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 Court may be pleased pleased to stay the operation of order CrI.M.P. No. 317 of 2024 in S.C. No. 100 of 2022 on the file of the Additional Assistant Session Judge, Kadapa, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. RAMALAKSHMANA REDDY SANEPALLI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10838/2025 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 proceedings in Crl.MP.No.317 of 2024 in S.C.No.100 of 2022 on the file of the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Kadapa. 2. Heard Sri S.Rama Lakshmana Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein is accused facing trial in S.C.No.100 of 2022 on the file of the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Kadapa for the offences under Sections 307, 326, 324 IPC. He further submits that prosecution witnesses 1 to 3 have already been examined as P.Ws.1 to 3. Thereafter, prosecution come up with petition Crl.MP.No.317 of 2024 seeking recall of P.W.1 to 3 for further examination to speak to the fact relating to motive for the alleged incident and also the medical record relating to the alleged treatment in NIMHANS and Saint John’s hospital, Bangalore. Learned counsel contends that the recall is an attempt to fill lacunae in the prosecution's case, and to that extent, the order permitting recall deserves to be set aside. 4 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that though petition discloses the purpose of recalling P.W.1 to 3 to speak to the fact of the motive as well as record relating to the treatment in Bangalore, the impugned order does not refer to motive. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would further submit that Court may pass appropriate orders. 5. Considering the submissions made and on keen perusal of the material placed on record. As rightly put by the learned counsel for the petitioner the prosecution witnesses 1 to 3 were examined long back. Now prosecution has come up with a petition to recall P.W.1 to 3 to speak about the motive which is not permissible since it may cause prejudice to the rights of the accused. It is needless to say that when the victims were injured is alive and deposed before the Court the motive is not essential. As rightly put by the leaned Additional Public Prosecutor, there is no whisper in the order to recall P.W.1 to 3 to speak about the motive. 6. In that view, the Criminal Petition is disposed of confirming the order passed by the learned Judge to the extent of recalling P.W.1 to 3 to speak about their treatment in NIMHANS and Saint John’s hospital, Bangalore. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 16.10.2025 SNI 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10838/2025 Dated.16.10.2025 SNI 91