Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
K Satyanarayana vs State Of Ap on 30 June, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTY DAY OF JUNE
TWO. THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
: PRESENT: . .
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
IA No. 2 OF 2021
IN
CRLP NO: 3475 OF 2021
Between:
1. Ketha Siva Prasad @ Ketha Satya Siva Prasad, S/o. K. Venkata Swamy, Aged
about 40 years, Occ: Business, R/o D.No.2-25-12/1, Kethavarl Street,
A.C. Gardents, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District. .
2, Ketha Satyanarayana @ Ketha Sathi Babu, S/o Venkata Swamy, Aged about 36
years, Occ: Business, R/o.D.No.2-25-12/1, Kethavari Street, A.C.Gardens,
Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District co
__,..Petitioners/Accused
(Petitioner in CRLP 3475 OF 2021
on the file of High Court)
AND . .
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through S.H.O Excise PS, Rajamahendravaram (South),
Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of
AP at Amaravathi. | .
. Respondent
(Respondents in-do-)
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in
the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay ail
further proceedings in FIR.No.134/2020 dated 10.03.2020 on the file of the Prohibition
and Excise Station, Rajamahendravaram (South), Rajamahendravaram including the
arrest of the Petitioner, pending disposal of CRLP No.3475 of 2021, on the file of the
High Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit
filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI M RK
CHAKRAVARTHY Advocate for the Petitioners and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
Respondent, the Court made the following
~ ORDER:
"The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.134 of 2020 of Prohibition and
Excise Station, Rajamahendravaram South. A case under Sections 34(e) riw 34(2)
of the A.P.Excise Act, 1968, was registered against them on the ground that when
the Excise Police on the instructions. given by the Superintendent of Prohibition
and Excise, went for a raid that they found the petitioners to be in possession of
1.D. liquor unauthorizedly. .
The petitioners mainly challenge the validity of the criminal proceedings
launched against them on the ground of non-compliance with the procedure
contemplated under Section 55 of the A.P.Excise Act. The petitioners relied on
the judgment of the Apex Court reported in (1979) 2 SCC P 115, wherein it is held
that search conducted by an officer without prior recording of the grounds for his
belief that an offence under the Act was likely or being committed is illegal. He
also relied on the order passed by this Court based on the judgment of the Apex
Court, in LA.No.1 of 2021 in Criminal Petition No.1640 of 2021.
Therefore, in view of the above legal position, the matter requires
examination in the main Criminal Petition whether launching of criminal
proceedings against the petitioners in the present case amounts to abuse. of
process of law or not. So, the petitioners could make out a strong prima facie
case warranting interference of this Court to examine the validity of the criminal
proceedings launched against them in the main Criminal Petition filed under
Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking quash of F.LR.
Therefore, in the said facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be
stay of further proceedings pursuant to registration of F.1.R in Crime No. 134 of
2020 of Prohibition and Excise Station, Rajamahendravaram South, till the next -
date of hearing." ,
SD/- SHAIK MOHD. RAFI.
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ii
#y a
#3
A!
HTRUE COPYI fis
For A' SECTIGN OFFICER
To,
4. The Prohibition and Excise Station, Rajamahendravaram (South),
Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District
One CC to SRI M R K CHAKRAVARTHY Advocate [OPUC]
Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of AP [OUT]
One spare copy
Pon
"
SS
HIGH COURT
CMRI
DATED:30/06/2021
ORDER
1A.NO.2 OF 2027
iN
CRLP.No.3475 of 2021
STAY
