Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Chintalapudi Gangadhar vs Yadlapalli Siva on 1 August, 2025
I..t>tt=+ APHCO10131672024
lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATl
EELE
FRIDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.I 1827 OF 2024
Between
Chintalapudi Gangadhar, s/o ch.somaraju, age 50 years, Occ:- Business,
R/o H.No.9-371, GopI-kriShna Colony, Turangi, Kakinada Rural Mandal,
Kakinada District
...PETITIONER/PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. Yadlapalli Siva, S/o. Veera Venkata Rama Pitchaiah, age about 28
years, Occ:- Business, R/o.D.No.30-3-6, Brahman veedhi
Suryanarayanapuram, Kakjnada, Kakinada (East Godavari) District.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its public Prosecutor, High
Court ofAndhra Pradesh at Amaravathi.
...RESPONDENT/SSTATE
Petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances
stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High Court
may be pleased to set aside the order dated 26-02-2024 made in
+- crl.M.P.No.6162 of 2023 in CC.No.325 of 2018, on the file of " Additional
JudI'Cl'al FI'rSt Class Magistrate, Kakinada.
[A NO:
\1 -
p6tition under section 482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS prayI'ng that l|n the
cl'rcumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of crimI'nal PetI'tiOn, the
High,Court may be pleased to stay a" further proceedings in ccNo.325 of
2018 on the file of II AddI'tiOnal Judicial First class Magistrate, Kakinada.
Counsel forthe petitioner .I SRI. I.N.IVl. RANGA RAO
counsel for the Respondents : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
The Court made the followl-ng ORDER :
_.a
APHCO10131672024
lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3396]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1827/2024
Between :
1.CHINTALAPUDI GANGADHAR, S/O CH.SOMARAJU, AGE 50
yEARS, OCC- BUSINESS, R,O H.riO.9-371, GOPIKRISHNA
COLONY, TURANGl, KAKINADA RURAL MANDAL, KAKINADA
DISTRICT
M.PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1.YADLAPALLI SIVA, S/O VEERA VENKATA RAMA PITCHAIAH,
AGE ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCC-'BUSINESS, R/O D.No.30-3-6,
BRAHMAN VEEDHl' SURYANARAYANAPURAM, KAKINADA,
KAKINADA (EAST GODAVARl) DISTRICT.
2.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT
AMARAVATH I.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLA[NANT(S):
Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS
counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1.TN M RANGARAO
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
The Court Made the Followin Order
The instant petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., has been filed by
the petitioner herein, seeking quashment of the order dated 26.02.2024 in
Crl.M.P.No.6162 of 2023 in C.C.No.325 of 2018 passed by the learned ll
Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kakinada.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant
Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.2/State. Notice sent to the
respondent No.1 was served but none entered appearance.
3. The petitioner herein is the accused who is facing the Trial in
C.C.No.325 of 2018 on the file of the learned lI Additional Judicial
Magistrate of First Glass, Kakinada, for the offence under section 138
and 142 of NI Act. Pending the said C.C., the petitioner herein filed
Petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. seeking to recall pw.1 for the purpose
of cross examination, on which, by an order dated 26,02,2024, the said
PetitI'On Was dismissed. Against which, the present criminal Petition has
been preferred.
4. Learned counsel forthe petitionerwould submit that an opportunity
may be give'n to the petitioner for further cross examination of pwl on
five questions which were not covered earlier. Learned counsel further
would submI't that' before the trI'al Court the matter was adjourned to
19.08.2025 and on the very same day the petitioner is ready to complete
the further cross examination of pw1. Learned counsel further would
submit that the petition may be considered on terms.
5. Considering the submissions made and a fair look a{ the mate'riaI
on record, the impugned order would show that the petition was
dI-SmiSsed for the reasons that the petitI'Oner iS filing the recall petitions
one after another for cross examinI-ng the PWl at different spells.
6- ln view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the Case and
since the petitioner herein is facing the trial in a criminal case, in order to
give one opportunity for further cross examination, the Criminal Petition is
allowed setting aside the order dated 26.02.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.6162 of
2023 in C.C.No.325 of 201,8 passed by the learned ll Additional Judicial
Magistrate of First Class, Kakinada. The trial Court is directed to permit
the petitioner for further cross-examination of PWl on 19.O8.2O25 subject
to putting five questions which are not covered earlier, on payment of
costs of Rs.5,000/-to the complainant.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.
SD/- M.PRABHAKAR RAO
ASSISTANT REGI s#R
//TRUE COPY// _--I:i --
SECTION OFFICER
To]
.3 . ±9.i`.I.t -,a 'Cl|' I i 5 '''L`'':'qu;y+ ` I+,rty* ..rt+.4`. q,
f'T:'` I 1. The ll Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada.
`l/,.
•.a -a
'N •--a
CO tT
`.i?I I-.-®-
OI -a ±¥-¥_.-;I: Z M RANGA RAO, Advocate [OPUC]
i'= J l3. Two ce#Sgl-N##Jblic prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at
Amaravathi. [OUT]
4. Two C.D Copies.
SSL
TAG
HIGH COURT
DATED:01/08/2025
ORDER
CRLP Nor 1827 OF 2024
CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED.
[ad_1]
Source link