G Sandeep Kumar v. K Venkatesulu
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed off
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ss. 35(3), 528
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 3(5), 308(2), 318(2), 318(4)
Judgment
Cause title
De-facto Complainant 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati ...Respondent
Petition Section 528 BNSS, circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused No. 2 & 3 in Cr. No. 141/2024 of Thavanampalli Police Station, Tirupati District. praying I.A. NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition praying Section 482 Cr.P.C r > the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings against the petitioners/accused No. 2 & 3 in Cr. No. 141/2024 of Thavanampalli Police Station, Tirupati District. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of
Sri D Purnachandra Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.2 and none appeared for the Respondent No.1 The Court made the following: APHC010138022025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3457] (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2948/2025 Between: G Sandeep Kumar and Others ...PETITIONER
/ACCUSED(S) AND K Venkatesulu and Others ...RESPONDENT
/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
1.D PURNACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
2. The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION No.2948 OF 2025
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
The petitioners were arraigned as A.2 and A.3 in Crime No. 141 of 2024 of Tavanampalli Police Station, registered for the alleged offences under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 308(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are no specific allegations against the petitioners and they were falsely implicated in the case. The learned counsel further submits that the offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable below 7 years and, therefore, seeks a direction to the police to follow the procedure provided under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, Station House Officer, Tavanampalli Police Station, Tirupati District, is directed to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, insofar as the petitioners are concerned. for the purpose of investigation in connection with Crime No. 141 of 2024. Contd..2P.. -2- CRLP. No.2948 of 2025
Operative part
Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed off.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the criminal petition Shall stand closed. To. Sd/- SHAIK MOHAMMED RAFI assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
1. The Station House Officer, District. Thavanampalli Police Station. Chittoor
2. One CC to Sri D.Purnachandra Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCS to The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati [OUT] 4. Three CD Copies. SAM HIGH COURT DATED:19/03/2025 SAM ORDER CRLP.No.2948 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE CRLP ^ 01 ^ ioBSPKtC'^^
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed off
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 35(3), 528; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 3(5), 308(2), 318(2), 318(4).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 19 Mar 2025. The bench was HARINATH N.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.