APHC010563502025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 29135/2025 Between: 1. KADURU CHINNAPPANNA, S/O. LATE CHINNA RAO, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC.FORMER SPECIAL OFFICER, ANDHRA PRADESH BHAWAN, GOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH, R/O. 1-36, COLONY, PAMULAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY - HOME DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 2. THE DIRECTOR, CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, 15-B, CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110003. 3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE POLICE, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. TIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS, REP.BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KT ROAD, SRINIVASA NAGAR, TIRUPATI. 5. S VEERESH PRABHU, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED MAJOR, OCC. JOINT DIRECTOR, CBI, HYDERABAD. 6. MURALI RAMBHA, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED MAJOR, OCC. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CBI, VISAKHAPATNAM. 7. SARVASHRESHTTRIPATHI, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED MAJOR, OCC. INSPECTOR GENERAL, AP STATE POLICE, GUNTUR. 8. GOPINATH JATTI, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED MAJOR, OCC. DIG, VISAKHAPATNAM RANGE, VISAKHAPATNAM. 9. SATYA KUMAR PANDA, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED MAJOR, OCC. NOMINEE OF FOOD SAFETY AND STANDARDS AUTHORITY OF INDIA OFFICE OF SIT, OLD SVBC 2 BUILDING, TIRUPATI. 10. J VENKAT RAO, S/O.NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED MAJOR, OCC. INVESTIGATION OFFICER, SPECIAL INVESTIGATION TEAM, OLD SVBC BUILDING ALIPIR, TIRUPATI - 517501. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. UDAY KUMAR VAMPUGADAVALA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. P S P SURESH KUMAR, Spl. Public Prosecutor for CBI The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 29135/2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the respondents in repeatedly issuing notices under Section 179 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) by the 10th respondent, with the sole intent to pressurize the petitioner to give his statements in accordance with their wishes, thereby causing serious prejudice to the petitioner's rights and personal liberty, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and contrary to the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and further direct the Respondents to conduct the investigation as per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in WP(C) No.622/2024, dated 4.10.2024.” 2. Heard Sri C. Nageswara Rao, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri V. Uday Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri P.S.P.Suresh Kumar, learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI. 3. Learned Senior Counsel would submit that the petitioner herein was PA to Sri Y. V. Subba Reddy, the then Chairman of TTD. The petitioner was summoned by SIT Authority regarding Crime No.470 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 274, 275, 316(5), 318(3), 318(4), 61(2), 299, 336(3), 340(2) r/w 49 and 3(5) of BNS and Section 51 and 59 of FSSA of East Police Station, Tirupati. Learned Senior Counsel would further submit that this is 5th time the petitioner was called to police station and he would further submit that the petitioner may be permitted to have the presence of his counsel at the time of examination by SIT. 4 4. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI would submit that the presence of the petitioner is necessary for further examination and hence, he was issued notice to appear before the SIT. Learned Special Public Prosecutor would further submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders as deem it fit and proper. 5. Considering the submissions made by both the counsel and on perusal of the material on record, the petitioner herein was called by the SIT as a witness for further examination. The only request made by the petitioner before this court is to permit him to have the presence of his counsel at the time of such examination by the SIT. 6. In that view, it is apposite to permit the petitioner to appear before the SIT accompanying by his counsel who can sit in a feasible distance and maintain decency and decorum and should not interfere with the investigation. 7. Accordingly, with the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:24.10.2025 ARB 5 81 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.29135 of 2025 Dt.24.10.2025 ARB