Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Seethala Keshav vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 1 July, 2024

APHC010267052024

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                 AT AMARAVATI             [3368]
                          (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                    MONDAY ,THE FIRST DAY OF JULY
                   TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
                              PRESENT

    THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

                   CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4329 of 2024

Between:
Seethala Keshav and Others                  ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)
                                     AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh          ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S)
and another
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
  1. CHALLA AJAY KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
  1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
                            PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.
                                           ORDER

No.    DATE
01. 01.07.2024        BVLNC,J

                                      I.A. No. 1 of 2024

Dispensed with for the present.

1) Heard Sri. Challa Ajay Kumar, learned Counsel for the Petitioners/Accused and Sri. Sravan Kumar Naidana, learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor, representing State.

2) Sri. Challa Ajay Kumar, would submit that, in this case, this Court earlier vide Order, dated 31.08.2023 in Crl. P. Nos. 5627 and 5742 of 2022 set-aside the earlier docket order, dated 05.07.2022, and directed the Magistrate for passing appropriate orders' in accordance with the guidelines issued by the hon'ble Apex Court in Pradeep S.Wodeyar Vs. State of Karnataka1 as expeditiously as possible. But the learned Magistrate on 20.03.2024, i.e. the impugned order, passed an order without following the guidelines of the hon'ble Apex Court in the above judgment. The docket order, dated 20.03.2024, is extracted here-under:

"Complainant present. Accused absent. Petition filed allowed. Taken on file taking cognizance U/s. 420, 406, 467 r/w 120(B) of I.P.C. against A1 to A3. Issue summons A1 to A3. Call on 08.04.2024."

3) The Order of the learned Magistrate does not disclose that the learned Magistrate has applied mind while taking cognizance and followed the guidelines of the hon'ble Apex Court in Pradeep judgment referred supra.

4) In that view of the matter, there shall be interim stay of proceedings in C.C.No.1358 of 2022 on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jaggayyapet, for a period of twelve [12] weeks.

2021 SCC Online SC 1140

1. Sri. Sravan Kumar Naidana, learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor, representing State, takes notice for Respondent No.1.

2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners/Accused is permitted to take out personal notice on Respondent No.2 by registered post with acknowledgment due and file proof of service before the Registry within a period of eight [08] weeks.

3. List the matter after eight [08] weeks.

________ BVLNC, J SM/