APHC010658202025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 12619 /2025 Between: 1. RASABATTULA SRINIVAS, S/O. SAMBHA MURTHY,D.NO.2-4-59/2, BHUPATHI VARI VEEDHI,AYYAPPASWAMY TEMPLE, NARASAPURAM ARRAYED ASD.NO.30265/37/2, VENKATESWARA NAGAR EXTENSION,NEAR SAI SWAPNA HOSPITAL, A.S.RAO NAGAR,NEREDIMET, MEDCHMEDCHAL MANDAL,OLD SAFIL GUDA, MALKAJIGIRI DIST ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI 2. POTHURI RAMESH RAJU, S/O VENKATA SUBBA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,RESIDENT OF POLAVARAM H/O Y.V.LANKA,NARASAPURAM MANDAL,WEST GODAVARI 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 may be pleased to call for records in and relating to S.T.C. No. 83 of 2024 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge -cum- I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Palakole and quash the same in so far as the Petitioner is concerned and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. SODUM ANVESHA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 The Court made the following: ORDER: This Criminal Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed, by the Petitioner/Accused, seeking to quash the Proceedings against him in STC No.83 of 2024 on the file of the Court of I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum- I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Palakole. Heard Ms.Sodum Anvesha, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent /State. Perused the material on record. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner herein is arrayed as an Accused in the above STC for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Further, the statutory demand notice was not given to the Petitioner as per the provisions of the Act and the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts. Petitioner worked in BGR Energy Company, worked at various places. He never stayed in Narasapuram. The address of the Petitioner at Narasapuram is not the correct address of the Petitioner and the plea of deemed service is misconceived. Learned counsel would submit that except bald and omnibus allegations, no specific overt acts are attributed against them. At this juncture, learned counsel restricted the prayer and would submit that the presence of the Petitioner may be dispensing with before the trial Court in which the STC is pending and the Criminal Petition may be disposed of by 3 giving liberty to the Petitioner to raise such contentions before the trial Court in defence. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. Considering the submissions made, the Criminal Petition is disposed of and the Petitioner is at liberty to raise the present contentions before the trial Court in his defence. However, the presence of the Petitioner/Accused before the trial Court is dispensed with, except on the specific dates as directed by the trial Court. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 09.12.2025 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Criminal Petition No. 12619 of 2025 09.12.2025 Mjl /*