BOONETI CHANAKYA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Special Investigation Team
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
In that view, the Criminal Petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 437, 438, 439, 482
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 528
- Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ss. 7, 7(a), 8, 13(1)(b), 13(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. In that view, the Criminal Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the petitioner is at liberty to move a fresh petition before the concerned Court. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date…
Judgment
Cause title
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Special Investigation Team, Rep by its Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT
/COMPLAINANT 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 Courtpleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with the case in Cr.No.21/2024 of CID P.S., which was registered for the alleged offences under Sections 409, 420, 120-B r/w 34, 37 of IPC and Sections 7, 7 (a), 8, 13 (1) (b), 1^ (2) of P.C Act, 1988 and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. G L NAGESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8808/2025
ORDER:
The instant criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C)/under Section 528 of BNSS, has been filed by the Petitioner/Accused No.8, seeking to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Cr.No.21 of 2024 of CID P.S., which was registered for the alleged offences under Sections 409, 420, 120-B r/w 34, 37 of IPC and Sections 7, 7(a), 8, 13(1)(b), 13(2) of PC Act, 1988.
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks the permission of this Court to withdraw the petition and would submit that liberty may be given to the petitioner to file a fresh petition before the concerned Court.
Permission is accorded.
Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State is in attendance.
Operative part
In that view, the Criminal Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the petitioner is at liberty to move a fresh petition before the concerned Court. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 01.09.2025 UPS 42 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8808/2025 Dated.01.09.2025 UPS
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In that view, the Criminal Petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 437, 438, 439, 482; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528; Indian Penal Code, 1860; Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — ss. 7, 7(a), 8, 13(1)(b), 13(2).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 01 Sep 2025. The bench was VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA.
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.