Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Bodempudi Nageswara Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 20 March, 2021
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
SATURDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
IA No. 1 OF 2021
IN
CRLP NO: 1640 OF 2021
Between:
Bodempudi Nageswara Rao, S/o Venkaiah, (father name was wrongly mentioned
as koteswara rao in FIR), age 25 years, Occ: Cultivation, R/o.Pichukalapalem
Village, Savalyapuram Mandal, Guntur District.
..Petitioner/Accused No.1
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of
Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, through the Enforcement Inspector, Special
Enforcement Bureau, Vinukonda Excise Station, Vinukonda, Guntur District.
...Respondent/Complainant
Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI KAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU
Counsel for the Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in
the memorandum of grounds filed in Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased
to grant stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of Crime No.02/ (2021)-Vinukonda-
17 of Vinukonda Excise Station, Vinukonda, Guntur District including arrest of the
Petitioner/Accused No.1 in the interest of justice, pending disposal of CRLP No.1640 of
2021, on the file of the High Court.
The court while directing issue of notice to the Respondents herein to show
cause as to why this application should not be complied with, made the following
order.(The receipt of this order will be deemed to be the receipt of notice in the case).
The Court made the following
Soe The petitioner mainly challenges the validity of the criminal proceedings
launched against the petitioner on the ground of non-compliance with the
procedure contemplated under Section 55 of the A.P.Excise Act. He is also
fortified with a judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the case of K.L.Subbayya
Vs. State of Karnataka 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 and
without effect and conviction based on such illegal search is liable to be set
aside. Therefore, in view of the said legal position, the matter requires
examination in the main Criminal Petition whether the launching of criminal
prosecution against the petitioner in the present case amounts to abuse of
process of law or not. So, the petitioner could make out a strong prima facie case
warranting interference of this Court to examine the validity of the criminal
proceedings launched against him in the main Criminal Petition.
Therefore, in the said facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be a
stay of further proceedings pursuant to registration of F.!.R in Crime No.02/ (2021)
Vinukonda-17 of Vinukonda Excise Station, Guntur District, till the next date of
hearing." y
SD/- G. SREENIVAS REDDY
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
IfTRUE COPYI/
For SECTION OFFICER
To,
1. The Enforcement Inspector, Special Enforcement Bureau, Vinukonda Excise
Station, Vinukonda, Guntur District.
One CC to Sri. Kambhampati Ramesh Babu, Advocate [OPUC]
Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP [OUT]
One spare copy.
DAWN
HIGH COURT
CMR,J
DATED:20/03/2021
POST THE MATTER AFTER FOUR (04) WEEKS
ORDER
IA No. 1 OF 2021
IN
CRLP.No.1640 of 2021
Sti
INTERIM OR
SEC TION
