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
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.