Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : 07-09-2026 Date of uploading : 08-09-2026 APHC010050462023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3604] MONDAY, THE 7th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 843/2023 Between: 1. THAMMISETTI KASTURI RANGA, S/O.VENKANNA, AGED 50 YEARS, BUSINESS, R/O.NEAR PANCHAYAT OFFICE, SEETHARAMAPURAM SOUTH, NARASAPUR MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY IT'S PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. PIPPALLA NARASIMHA RAO, S/O.SURYANARAYANA, AGED 63 YEARS, MALE, HINDU, RETIRED EMPLOYEE, NARSAPUR, NARSAPUR TOWN LIMITS, 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 pleased to allow the present Criminal Petition by setting aside the order dated 18-11-2022 passed in Crl.M.P. No.6525 of 2022 in C.C.No.140 of 2018 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge- cum-Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Narsapur, West Godavari District and permit the petitioner to further cross-examine the P.W.1 in CC.No.140 of 2018 and pass 2 SUN, J Crlp_843_2023 IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No.140 of 2018 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Narsapur, West Godavari District pending disposal of the above Crl.P., 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 Vacate the interim stay orders dated 02-02- 2023 granted in Criminal Petition No. 843 of 2023, pending disposal of the criminal petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. P DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUPPALA RAMA YETHI RAJA PRAJITH 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: 3 SUN, J Crlp_843_2023 THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM CRIMINAL PETITION No. 843 OF 2023 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/ accused to set aside the order dated 18.11.2022 passed in Crl.M.P. No.6525 of 2022 in C.C. No.140 of 2018 on the file of learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narsapur, West Godavari District. 2. As seen from the record, respondent No.2 filed complaint in C.C. No.140 of 2018 for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). When the matter is posted for cross examination of PW.1, petitioner took several adjournments to complete cross examination of PW.1 and finally, on 30.09.2022, the learned trial Court closed the further cross examination of PW.1. Further, petitioner filed Crl.M.P. No.6525 of 2022 to recall the evidence of PW.1 so as to conduct further cross examination and at the culmination of enquiry, the said petition is dismissed vide order dated 18.11.2022. Feeling aggrieved by the same, this instant petition is filed. 3. The grounds urged by the petitioner in this petition are that, the order of the learned trial Court is erroneous, contrary to law and result of improper exercise of the jurisdiction, opposed to the very spirit and object of the provisons of Section 311 of the code of Criminal Procedure, the learned trial Court is grossly erred in not appreciating the contention of the petitioner and trial Court ought to have seen that the categoric case of the petitioner that the further examination of PW1 is very essential, further the trial Court ought to have given an opportunity to the petitioner to cross examine the PW.1, in view of the fact that the cheque was returned as ‘refer to drawer’, and with other formal grounds, prayed to set aside the order dated 18.11.2022 passed in Crl.M.P. No.6525 of 2022 in C.C. No.140 of 2018 on the file of learned I 4 SUN, J Crlp_843_2023 Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narsapur, West Godavari District. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 5. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 fairly conceded to allow the petition giving opportunity to the petitioner to conduct further cross examination on payment of costs. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to non availability of learned counsel for the petitioner, he could not conduct further cross examination of PW.1 and further evidence of PW.1 is closed during covid pandemic period and requested not to impose any costs on the petitioner. 6. The record clearly reveals that initially respondent No.2 was examined in chief on 12.03.2021 and thereafter, the matter is posted to 23.03.2021 for cross examination of PW1 and after granting several adjournments, when the matter is posted to 18.11.2021, again learned counsel for the petitioner requested time and then, the matter is adjourned on payment of costs of Rs.200/-. Further, on two occasions, the matter is referred to Lok Adalat and since the matter is not settled, returned to the regular Court and finally posted the matter to 20.09.2022 for further cross examination of PW.1. On that day, learned trial Court closed the cross examination of PW.1 on the ground that PW.1 is aged about 67 years and the matter is of the year 2018, 7. As seen from the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narsapur, West Godavari District, cogent and justifiable reasons are assigned to negate the request of the petitioner. The covid pandemic period was from March, 2020 to January, 2022, whereas, the matter is adjourned upto 30.09.2022, at the request of learned counsel for the petitioner and on 30.09.2022, when the matter is finally posted for cross examination also, petitioner requested time on the ground of non-availability of his counsel. 5 SUN, J Crlp_843_2023 Having considered the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court and object of 311 Cr.P.C, the learned trial Court dismissed the petition by assigning justifiable reasons, however having considered the fair submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner to allow the petition and to meet ends of justice, this Court is of the considered view that, one opportunity may be given to the petitioner so as to conduct further cross examination of PW.1, on the date fixed by the trial Court, without fail. 8. 8. In the result, this Criminal Petition is allowed on payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) payable to the respondent No.2/ PW.1 on the date of further cross examination of PW.1. Registry is directed to communicate the copy of the order to the trial Court forthwith. As a sequel thereto, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ SUNITHA GANDHAM, J 07.09.2026 knl