APHC010327442025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION Between: 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SURYARAOPET PS, VIJAYAWADA CITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF A.P., AT AMARAVATI. 1. KOSURI ARAVIND, S/O. LAKSHMI R/O. H. NO. 61, GROUND FLOOR, RK GARDENS, NEAR HOLIDAY VILLAGE RESORTS, MALLASANDRA, KANAKAPURI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE. 2. KOSURI LAKSHMIVITHAL RAO, S/O. VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED 65 YEARS R/O. FLAT NO. 204, HARIKA ENCLAVE, 6/19, BRODIPET, GUNTUR. 3. SMT KOSURI SYAMALA, W/O. LAKSHMI VITHAL RAO, AGED 60 YEARS R/O. FLAT NO. 204, HARIKA ENCLAVE, 6/19, BRODIPET, GUNTUR. 4. SMT BELLAPU SRAVANTHI, W/O. SANDEEP, AGED 37 YEARS, KAMAKSHI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, RADIAL ROAD VELACHERI BR., CHENNAI. 5. BELLAPU SANDEEP, S/O. BENARJI, AGED 44 YEARS, R/O. TARAMANI ROAD, ARAMANI MAIN ROAD VELACHERI BR., CHENNAI. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6858/2025 THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SURYARAOPET PS, VIJAYAWADA CITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF A.P., AT AMARAVATI. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND KOSURI ARAVIND, S/O. LAKSHMI VITHAL RAO, AGED 42 YEARS, R/O. H. NO. 61, GROUND FLOOR, RK GARDENS, NEAR HOLIDAY VILLAGE RESORTS, MALLASANDRA, KANAKAPURI MAIN ROAD, KOSURI LAKSHMIVITHAL RAO, S/O. VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED 65 YEARS R/O. FLAT NO. 204, HARIKA ENCLAVE, 6/19, BRODIPET, GUNTUR. SMT KOSURI SYAMALA, W/O. LAKSHMI VITHAL RAO, AGED 60 YEARS R/O. FLAT NO. 204, HARIKA ENCLAVE, 6/19, BRODIPET, SMT BELLAPU SRAVANTHI, W/O. SANDEEP, AGED 37 YEARS, KAMAKSHI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, RADIAL ROAD VELACHERI BR., BELLAPU SANDEEP, S/O. BENARJI, AGED 44 YEARS, R/O. TARAMANI ROAD, ARAMANI MAIN ROAD VELACHERI BR., IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3396] THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SURYARAOPET PS, VIJAYAWADA CITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED VITHAL RAO, AGED 42 YEARS, R/O. H. NO. 61, GROUND FLOOR, RK GARDENS, NEAR HOLIDAY VILLAGE RESORTS, MALLASANDRA, KANAKAPURI MAIN ROAD, KOSURI LAKSHMIVITHAL RAO, S/O. VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED 65 YEARS R/O. FLAT NO. 204, HARIKA ENCLAVE, 6/19, SMT KOSURI SYAMALA, W/O. LAKSHMI VITHAL RAO, AGED 60 YEARS R/O. FLAT NO. 204, HARIKA ENCLAVE, 6/19, BRODIPET, SMT BELLAPU SRAVANTHI, W/O. SANDEEP, AGED 37 YEARS, KAMAKSHI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, RADIAL ROAD VELACHERI BR., BELLAPU SANDEEP, S/O. BENARJI, AGED 44 YEARS, R/O. TARAMANI ROAD, ARAMANI MAIN ROAD VELACHERI BR., ...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 Courtpleased to quash the Order dated 07.05.2025 passed in CrI.M.P. No. 253 of 2025 in SC No. 2 of 2021 on the file of Honble Court of Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Vijayawada and to 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 pleased to stay all further proceedings in SC No. 2 of 2021 on the file of Hon’ble Court of Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Vijayawada pending disposal of main Criminal Petition and to 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 may be pleased consider the photo copy of the documents as the additional material on behalf of the Petitioner/respondent herein and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. M R S SRINIVAS The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6858/2025 ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023 (u/s.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) has been filed by the State, seeking quashment of the Order dated 07.05.2025 passed in CrI.M.P. No. 253 of 2025 in SC No. 2 of 2021 on the file of Honble Court of Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Vijayawada. 2. Heard Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State, and Sri S. Srinivas, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Accused. 3. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the state would submit that the prosecution filed Crl.M.P. No. 253 of 2025 under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to reopen the evidence of LW2, who is the father of the victim and LW18 i.e. Investigating officer, since their evidence is essential to the case of prosecution. Learned Asst. Public Prosecutor would submit that initially, the prosecution filed Crl.M.P. No. 469 of 2023 seeking recall of LW2 and Crl.M.P. No. 49 of 2024 for recall of LWs. 3, 10, 11, 12 and 18. The Crl.M.P. No. 469 of 2023 was dismissed on 02.11.2023 as the LW2 was called absent on the date of adjournment and the Crl.M.P. No. 49 of 2024 was allowed only to the extent of LWs 3 and 11 and dismissed for LWs 10, 12 and 18. The Trial Court dismissed the said petition observing that the prosecution filed the present petitions after almost one year from date of dismissal of earlier petitions and further, that no proper reasons were mentioned as to why the presence of the witnesses was not secured at earlier stage. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the witnesses are ready and willing to depose before the Trial Court without any further delay and a fair opportunity may be given to prove the case of prosecution. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the prosecution had earlier filed applications for recalling witnesses on two occasions. However, the prosecution could not secure the presence of the said witnesses before the Court, as a result of which, the present application filed by the prosecution was dismissed. Learned counsel would submit that the prosecution filed petition to recall LW2 and 18, after completion of examination of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C and there are no grounds to allow the present Criminal Petition.Learned counsel prays to dismiss the present Criminal Petition. 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajaram Prasad Yadav vs. State of Bihar1enumerated the necessary principles to be considered while dealing with applications under Section 311 Cr.P.C., as follows: 23. From a conspectus consideration of the above decisions, while dealing with an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. read along with Section 138 of the Evidence Act, we feel the following principles will have to be borne in mind by the Courts: 12013 (14) SCC 461 a) Whether the Court is right in thinking that the new evidence is needed by it? Whether the evidence sought to be led in under Section 311 is noted by the Court for a just decision of a case? b) The exercise of the widest discretionary power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. should ensure that the judgment should not be rendered on inchoate, inconclusive speculative presentation of facts, as thereby the ends of justice would be defeated. c) If evidence of any witness appears to the Court to be essential to the just decision of the case, it is the power of the Court to summon and examine or recall and re-examine any such person. d) The exercise of power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. should be resorted to only with the object of finding out the truth or obtaining proper proof for such facts, which will lead to a just and correct decision of the case. e) The exercise of the said power cannot be dubbed as filling in a lacuna in a prosecution case, unless the facts and circumstances of the case make it apparent that the exercise of power by the Court would result in causing serious prejudice to the accused, resulting in miscarriage of justice. f) The wide discretionary power should be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily. g) The Court must satisfy itself that it was in every respect essential to examine such a witness or to recall him for further examination in order to arrive at a just decision of the case. h) The object of Section 311 Cr.P.C. simultaneously imposes a duty on the Court to determine the truth and to render a just decision. i) The Court arrives at the conclusion that additional evidence is necessary, not because it would be impossible to pronounce the judgment without it, but because there would be a failure of justice without such evidence being considered. j) Exigency of the situation, fair play and good sense should be the safe guard, while exercising the discretion. The Court should bear in mind that no party in a trial can be foreclosed from correcting errors and that if proper evidence was not adduced or a relevant material was not brought on record due to any inadvertence, the Court should be magnanimous in permitting such mistakes to be rectified. k) The Court should be conscious of the position that after all the trial is basically for the prisoners and the Court should afford an opportunity to them in the fairest manner possible. In that parity of reasoning, it would be safe to err in favour of the accused getting an opportunity rather than protecting the prosecution against possible prejudice at the cost of the accused. The Court should bear in mind that improper or capricious exercise of such a discretionary power, may lead to undesirable results. l) The additional evidence must not be received as a disguise or to change the nature of the case against any of the party. m) The power must be exercised keeping in mind that the evidence that is likely to be tendered, would be germane to the issue involved and also ensure that an opportunity of rebuttal is given to the other party. n) The power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must therefore, be invoked by the Court only in order to meet the ends of justice for strong and valid reasons and the same must be exercised with care, caution and circumspection. The Court should bear in mind that fair trial entails the interest of the accused, the victim and the society and, therefore, the grant of fair and proper opportunities to the persons concerned, must be ensured being a constitutional goal, as well as a human right.” (Emphasis supplied) 6. In the present case, the State filed two Crl.M.P.s before the Trial Court seeking to reopen the evidence of LW2 and LW18 and the said petitions were dismissed. The presence of LW2 could not be secured on the date of given adjournment as he was ill on that day and the evidence of LW18 was closed as he could not appear before the Trial Court.In the criminal trial, it is burden of the prosecution to prove the case beyond the reasonable doubt. There is no doubt that the examination of LW2, who is the father of the victim and the LW13, i.e. investigating officer is crucial and helpful to the case of the prosecution and non-examination of the said witnesses would cause prejudice to the case of the prosecution. In the light of the aforementioned circumstances and legal decision referred supra, this Court is of the opinion that the very purpose of conducting a trial is to elicit the truth and a fair opportunity has to be given to the prosecution to present its case before the Trial Court. 6. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed. However, the prosecution is directed to produce the said witnesses on the very next date of adjournment before the Trial Court. Failing compliance, this order shall stand dismissed automatically. Pending applications, if any, shall stands closed. ___________________________________ DR.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA,J Date: 03.12.2025 KKV HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6858/2025 Dt.03-12-2025 KKV HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATI MAIN CASE NO.: CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6858/2025 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No. Date ORDER OFFICE NOTE 1 03.12.2025 Dr.VJP,J The Criminal Petition is allowed. (Vide separate order) ________ Dr.VJP, J KKV