APHC010104282026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE 29th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5544 OF 2026 Between: 1. Perli Ravi Kumar, S/o George,Aged about 49 years,R/oD.No. 80-27-12,Thotaramulu nagar, 3rd lane,A.V. Appa Rao road,Rainahendravaram,East Godavari district. 2. Susanna Ravi Kumar alias Susana, W/o Ravi Kumar,aged about 43 years,R/o D.No.80-27-12,Thotaramulu Nagar, 3rd lane,.A.V. AppaRao road,Raj amahendravaram.East Godavari district. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State SHO, Raj amahendravaram Taluka district. East GodavariRep. by A.P. State Public ProsecutorA.P. High Court, Amaravathi .. 2. Kandrakota Kiran, S/o Daveedu, Aged about 45 yrs, C/SC Madiga, D.No.2-9-18, Tumu Vari street, Near Railway station, Rajamahendravaram, Cell 9676343333 3. Bhimireddy Naga Mallika, D/o Nageswara Rao, Aged about 40 years R/o 4th lane, Chaitanya Nagar, near wonder kids 2 playschool, Morampudi, Rajamahendravaram rural. East Godavari District. 4. Dr Kanireddy Nageswara Rao, S/o not known to this Petitioner, aged about 60 years, Occ Retired CTRI Scientist, R/o 4th lane, Chaitanya Nagar, near wonder kids playschool, Morampudi, Rajamahendravaram rural, - East Godavari District ...Respondents 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 entire crime Registered in FIR No. FIR No.180/2025 dated 10-11-2025 Under Section 3 (l)(r), 3(l)(s) POA ACT, 351 (2) BNS of P.S. Prakash Nagar, Raja Mahendravarm, East Godavari District against the petitioners/ accused No C SC ST ir 1 &2 basing on the complainant dated 8-11-2025 at a 17-30 PM given by Defacto 3 Complainant Namely Kandrakota Kiran, S/o Daveedu, the 2-“ respondent herein at the instigation and abetment of building owners i.e., the 3' and 4“' respondent herein and as a counter case against the Y complaint given by the 2"'* petitioner/accused on 10-11-2025 to the S P of east Godavari which is Registered as a crime No.181 of 2025 U/s 329(3X351(2) r/w 3(5) BNS And consequently to issue directions not to arrest the petitioners/ accused Nol &2 and also not to call them for police station during investigations of this case, since the petitioners/accused No. 1 &2 highly qualified and reputed persons in the society and they are defamed by Respondents Nolto 4 here in and to quash the entire FIR and Crime against the petitioners/Accused affidavit and grounds follows 3 IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 condone the delay 103 days in re-presenting the Criminal Petition - Efiling/CRLP/2057/2026, in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2026 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 issue direction not to arrest petitioner/ Accused No.l &2 in Crime No, 180 of 2025 Under Section 3 (l)(r), 3(l)(s) SC ST POA ACT, 351 (2) BNS of P.S. Prakash Raja Mahendravarm, East Godavari District and not to arrest the petitioners/ accused No1 &2 and also not to call them for police station during the investigations of this case, since the petitioners/accused No.l &2 are highly qualified and reputed persons in the society and A they are defamed by Respondents No 1 to 4 here in basing on the quash grounds and Crime against the petitioners/Accused on the followed Respective affidavit and grounds follows. IA NO: 3 OF 2026 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 the filing of the FIR No. 180/2025 dated 10-11- 4 2025 of PS Prakash Nagar, East Godavari District, in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioners: SODUM ANVESHA,NEELA MANJARI J S Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5544 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: Instant Criminal Petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023, has been filed on behalf of the petitioners herein (A1 & A2), seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR in Crime No.180 of 2025 of Prakash Nagar Police Station, East Godavari District, for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to the Order dated 08.07.2026, he has taken notice on respondent No.2 and filed a memo of proof of service to that effect. 3. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that he has taken notice to respondent No.2. 4. Despite service of notice, none represented respondent No.2. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after arguing for some time, has confined his argument to the extent of protecting the petitioner herein from the police on the ground that the offences 6 alleged are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven (07) years and prays this Court to direct the police to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Substantiating the same, he relied on the Order dated 25.10.2017 of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, at Hyderabad in Rajulapati Ankababu Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh1 and the Order of this Court dated 01.05.2024 in Crl.P.No.2416 of 2024 in Kandala Penchalaiah and Others Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh. 6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor did not oppose the same and concurred with the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners for the reason that the offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. 7. Heard. Perused the entire available material on record. 8. In this context it is appropriate to note the dictum held in Rajulapati Ankababu’s case, wherein the Common High Court at Hyderabad, dealt with the identical issue. For comprehensive view, the relevant portion is extracted hereunder: 1 Crl.P.No.7468 of 2011 dated 25.10.2017 7 “31. The core issue which falls for consideration at this juncture is whether the Investigating Officer has to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 41A of Cr.P.C., while conducting investigation in respect of the offences alleged to have been committed under the provisions of the SC/ST Act. 32. The SC/ST Act came into force with effect from 30.1.1990. Section 41A of Cr.P.C., was introduced in the year 2010. The Parliament was very much aware of the provisions of the SC/ST Act at the time of introducing Section 41A of Cr.P.C., in the year 2010. Had it been the intention of the Parliament to exclude the application of Section 41A of Cr.P.C., in respect of the offences committed under the SC/ST Act, the same might have been reflected in the Cr.P.C. There is no specific provision under the SC/ST Act, excluding the application of Section 41 of Cr.P.C. The Parliament amended the provisions of the SC/ST Act, by way of Amendment Act 1 of 2016 by introducing certain provisions. The Parliament is very much aware of existence of Section 41A of Cr.P.C., at the time of making suitable amendments to the SC/ST Act. It is a settled principle of law that the provisions of Cr.P.C., are applicable to the Special Acts so far as the investigation, inquiry and trial are concerned, unless there is specific provisions under the Special Act. Even under the amended Act, there is no provision which specifically excludes the application of Section 41A of Cr.P.C., in respect of offences committed under the SC/ST Act. 8 33. Having regard to various provisions of the Cr.P.C., and the SC/ST Act referred supra, and the principle enunciated in Arnesh Kumar, I am of the considered view that Section 41A Cr.P.C., in letter and spirit, is applicable to the offences committed under the SC/ST Act if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend upto seven years, whether with or without fine.” 9. Since the offences alleged in FIR in Crime No.180 of 2025 of Prakash Nagar Police Station, East Godavari District are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years and in view of the no objection expressed by the Assistant Public Prosecutor, coupled with the well-settled legal principles held in Rajulapati Ankababu‘s case, this Court directs the respondent/police to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to Section 41A Cr.P.C., scrupulously as per the guidelines enunciated in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another2, which was reiterated in the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Satendar Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of 2 (2014) 8 SCC 273 9 Investigation and Another3 in FIR in Crime No.180 of 2025 of Prakash Nagar Police Station, East Godavari District. 10. If it is noticed in the course of investigation that the petitioners have committed any offence which is punishable with imprisonment beyond seven years, the investigating officer is at liberty to proceed in accordance with the law. 11. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 29.07.2026 PSA 3 2026 SCC OnLine SC 162 10 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5544 of 2026 Date: 29.07.2026 PSA