HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
MOTAMARRI VENKATA BABA PRASAD @ BABAPRASAD – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
CRLP 1615/2025
##PAGE1##
2026:APHC:23909
APHC010074202025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3521]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1615/2025
Between:
1. M OTAMARRI VENKATA BABA PRASAD @ BABAPRASAD, S/O
SESHAVATARAM, AGED 57 YEARS, D.NO. 10/307, EX. MUNICIPAL
CHAIRMAN, NIZARNPET, MACHILIPATNAM
2. K OTTE ANKA VENKATARAO, S/O VENKATESWARA RAO AGED 62
YEARS, D.NO.20/288, BRAHMAPURAM, MACHILIPATNAM
3. G ANIPISETTI GOPAL @ GOPAL KRISHNA, S/O CHALAPATHI RAO
AGED 63 YEARS, EDEPALLI MACHILIPATNAM
4. B ANDI RAMAKRISHNA, S/O VENKATESWARA RAO AGED 63
YEARS, D.NO.21-191-3, ENGLISHPALEM, MACHILIPATNAM
5. C HINNAM SIVA NAGESWARA RAO, S/O VENKATESWARA RAO
AGED 39 YEARS, D.NO.25/108-1, JAGANNADHAPURAM,
MACHILIPATNAM
6. T IPPALA VENKATA KANTHARAO, S/O SURYAPRAKASA RAO,AGED
46 YEARS, D.NO.1-261, KHALEKHANPET, MACHILIPATNAM.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)
AND
1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. T HE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KRISHNA DISTRICT AT
MACHILIPATNAM.
##PAGE2##2
2026:APHC:23909
3. S TATION HOUSE OFFICER, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE R. PET
POLICE STATION
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
1. MALLAVOLU NIKITHA
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
ORDER
Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.,’) by the
Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 to 6, seeking to quash the proceedings against
Petitioner/Accused Nos.1 to 6 in C.C.No.555 of 2020 on the file of II Additional
Judicial First Class Magistrate, Machilipatnam, Krishna District.
2. The allegations against the Petitioners arise from a report lodged by
one Mr. Lakshmimojinaidu Adapa, a labourer and resident of Ramanaidupet,
Machilipatnam. He lodged a complaint with the police alleging that on
07.01.2020 at about 17:20 hours, near the Head Post Office, Main Road,
Machilipatnam, the Petitioners, who are sympathizers of the Telugu Desam
Party and Janasena Party, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and
observed a Rasta Roko by standing on the main road near the Head Post
Office and raising slogans. It was further alleged that, as a result of their
actions, inconvenience was caused to the public by obstructing the free flow of
traffic. Based on the said report, a case in Crime No.5 of 2020 was registered
##PAGE3##3
2026:APHC:23909
in the Robinsonpet Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections
341 and 188 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity
‘the I.P.C.,’).
3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Ms. M. Nikitha, contends that none
of the offences under Sections 341 and 188 of ‘the I.P.C.,’ are made out.
There is no material placed on record to establish that any order was
promulgated by a lawfully empowered public servant and that such order was
in force at the time of the alleged offence. Therefore, there are no allegations
of disobedience resulting in harmful consequences as required under Section
188 of ‘the I.P.C.’ Further, there is no act of wrongful restraint as defined
under Section 339 of ‘the I.P.C.,’ and in the absence of any voluntary
obstruction preventing a person from proceeding in any direction in which he
has a right to proceed, the offence under Section 341 of ‘the I.P.C.,’ is not
attracted. The FIR is bereft of the essential ingredients required to constitute
the alleged offences, and therefore the registration of the case itself amounts
to an abuse of the process of law.
4. Sri A.Sai Rohith, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, in refutation of
the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, would
contend that the allegations in the FIR clearly disclose the commission of
cognizable offences. It is urged that the Petitioners, being political
sympathizers, had deliberately congregated on a public thoroughfare and
staged
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.