SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 16663

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
Kuricheti Siva Ramakrishna – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
CRLP 13488/2025



##PAGE1##

2025:APHC:61878

APHC010710812025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

ATAMARAVATI [3521]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 13488/2025

Between:

1.KURICHETI SIVA RAMAKRISHNA, S/O RAMAIAH ,AGE 53

YEARS,R/O FLAT NO.204,SVC APARTMENT,NEAR GUPTA CENTRE,

VIJAYAWADATOWN KRISHNA DISTRICT,ANDHRA PRADESH.

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

AND

1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Through the SHO of I town

P.S,NTR CommissionarateKrishna District, Rep, by its Public

prosecutor.High Court ofAndhra PradeshAt Amaravathi.

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

1.D KASI RAO

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The instant Criminal Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik

Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) has been filed, by the

Petitioner/Accused, seeking quashment of the proceedings against him in

C.C.No.3578 of 2023 on the file of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,

##PAGE2##

2

Vijayawada City for the offences under Section 20(2) of the Cigarettes and

Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of

Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (for

brevity ‘the COTPAAct’).

2. Heard Sri D.Kasi Rao, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Ms.

K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learnedAssistant Public Prosecutor for the State.

3. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and acceded to,

by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor that the subject matter of this

Criminal Petition is squarely covered by the common order passed by this

Court in Jaganath Enterprises v. State of A.P, 2025:APHC:61878 at paragraph Nos.29, 30 & 31

it is held as under:

“29. But as far as the present casesare concerned, this Court by exercising

the power under section 482 Cr.P.C. and following the mandate of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in State of Haryana v. Bhajan lal7 and the

judgment of the High Court of Allahabad in Pepsico India Holdings (Pvt)

Ltd., (4 supra), is constrained to hold that all the FIRs/cases that have been

registered under the provisions of the IPC, FSSAct and the COTPAAct are

quashed, leaving it open to them, if they so desire to pursue the

prosecution in respect of the offences under the other enactments, if any.

The offences under the NDPS Act can be pursued. The offences under the

COTPAAct, can only be launched if the police find that the sections 5, 6 7

and 10 are not complied with. Except on these very limited grounds

genuine/legitimatetraderscannot be prosecuted.

30. It is hoped that copies of the orders passed by the learned single Judge

in Crl.P. No. 3731 of 2018 and batch and this order are widely circulated by

the Director General of Police and the Chief Secretary of the State of

Andhra Pradesh through out the state of Andhra Pradesh so that the time

and effort of the police are devoted to more serious crimes. Whatever be

the impact of tobacco products on the health of an individual or the nation;

till the law is amended/modified it has to be followed. As held by many

Courtsearlier;it maybe hard,but it is thelaw.

31. Withtheaboveobservations, thecriminal petitionsareallowed.”

1 2019 SCC OnLine AP 199

##PAGE3##

3

4. In Tammana Srinivasa Rao v. State of A.P, 2025:APHC:61878 another learned Single

Judge of this Court, following the ratio laid down in Jaganath Enterprises

supra, allowed the petition under similar factual circumstances.

5. The controversy raised in the present petition is squarely covered by the

principles enunciated in Jaganath Enterprises supra, wherein it was

categorically held that all FIRs and prosecutions instituted under the

provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the Food Safety and Standards Act, and

‘the COTPA Act’ are liable to be quashed, save and except where the police

establish specific non-compliance with Sections 5, 6, 7, and 10 of ‘the

COTPA.’ The said precedent underscores that bona fide trad

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top