Back
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Dr Y. Lakshmana Rao, J
Thopudurthi Prakash Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State of AP – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural requirement for filing complaints under the bns. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. citing of precedents to highlight a necessary complaint for prosecution. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. limitations on immunity across different legal statutes. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. order to stay proceedings due to lack of proper complaint. (Para 12) |
Court made the following: ORDER: ;
The criminal petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Cr.No.23 of 2025 dated 12.06.2025 of Ramagiri Police Station, registered for the alleged offences under Sections 221 , 223, 224, 292, 126(2), 196(1), 132, 351(3), 61(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS ’),.
2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was not present at the scene of alleged offence at the t time of the commission. Section 215 of ‘the BNS S.,’ DiVER, J Crl.P.No.6201 of 2025 Dated 24.06.2025 bars the prosecution for contempt of lawful authority of public servants for. offences against public justice and for offences relating to documents given in ~ evidence. Section 215 of ‘the BNS S.,’ mandates that no Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under Sections 206 to 223 of ‘the B
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
