APHC010070772025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457]

WEDNESDAY ,THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1580/2025

Between:

V Satheesh ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

AND

Sriram Chandrasekhar Chintu and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

1.P SAI SURYA TEJA

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

1.D PURNACHANDRA REDDY

2.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Court made the following:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH. N

CRIMINAL PETITION No.1580 of 2025

ORDER :

The petitioner is challenging the docket order dated 22.01.2025 passed by the learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge – Cum – Special Court for Trial of Offences against women, Chittoor.

• 2. The petitioner is listed witness No.1 (LW.1) and the sanction proceedings were sought to be marked through V.Siva Subramanyam/PW-56. The PW-56 who was the Clerk in the office of District Collector and he was the person and during his service he had processed the application and that he would also identify the signature of the sanctioning authority, the document was sought to be marked.
• 3. The defence objected for marking the said document through PW-56 as PW-56 is neither the author of the document nor is he the competent person to get the document marked on behalf of the Collector.
• 4. The learned Judge has considered the objection raised by the defence counsel and sustained the objection raised by the defence counsel.

5. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this is the second round of litigation. The prosecution has filed Crl.MP.No.512 of 2024 in SC.No.110 of 2016 seeking to summon V.Siva Subramanyam, who had retired from service on 31.08.2017 as Deputy Tahsildar. The prosecution proposed to examine him and confront the Collector's proceedings in D.Dis.C4/616/2016, dated 17.02.2016. The defence objected for marking the said document and also for summoning V.Siva Subramanyam. The learned Sessions Judge had dismissed the said petition. Aggrieved by the same, the prosecution filed the Criminal Petition No.7448 of 2024, which was allowed by this Court on 07.12.2024. The operative portion reads as follows ;

In that view, to give a fair opportunity to both sides to prove their respective contentions before the court of law, in the interest of justice, the petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The prosecution is permitted to examined Sri V.Siva Subramanyam, as a witness on behalf of the prosecution to speak about the sanction proceedings and for identification of the signature of the District Collector on the sanction proceedings. To meet the ends of justice, the learned Trial Judge is directed to take up the matter for examining the rest of witnesses in a day to day basis since the sessions case is of the year 2016 without giving any adjournment in a casual way on mere asking.

6. The witness was summoned as desired by the prosecution. However, the sanctioned proceedings which were proposed to be marked by the prosecution was objected by the defence on the

ground that V.Siva Subramanyam (PW-56) was not authorized to give evidence on behalf of the Collector or on behalf of the Government. Thus, the evidence of PW-56 was not permitted to mark the sanctioned the proceedings.

• 7. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that it is not essential for the prosecution to mark the exhibit through the PW-56 and the same could also be marked through the investigating officer whose examination was scheduled. It is also submitted that the PW-56 is an incompetent witness for marking the sanctioned proceedings issued by the Collector.
• 8. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the witness is competent to identify the signature of the Collector and thus is a competent witness to mark the said proceedings.
• 9. Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent.
• 10. Rule 240 (4) of the Criminal Rules of Practice would entitle a Retired Government Servant to give evidence in respect of his official acts or matters within his knowledge before retirement shall be paid Travelling and Subsistence Allowance according to the

rates he would have been eligible under the Andhra Pradesh Travelling Allowance Rules, had he not retired from service.

• 11. The order of the learned trial judge upholding the objections raised by the defence counsel cannot sustain and deserved to be set aside. PW-56 who retired as Deputy Tahsildar is aware of the sanctioned proceedings and he is able to identify the signature of the person who issued the sanctioned proceedings. It is not necessary for a witness to be an author of that document for marking it. It is also not necessary for the witness to be who have issued such proceedings for marking it.
• 12. The contention of the respondent that the same could also be marked by the Investigating Officer would not disentitle the prosecution to get it marked through a witness who is aware of the proceedings and who is able to identify the proceedings and also identify the signature of the issuing authority. The said witness when confronted with such proceedings he would depose all that he knows about the confronted document and the same can be marked subject to objection.
• 13. With these observations the docket proceeding dated 22.01.2025 denying the opportunity of adducing evidence by PW-56 on the sanctioned proceedings is hereby set aside and the learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge – Cum – Special Court for

Trial of Offences against women, Chittoor shall permit the prosecution to further examine PW-56 for the purpose for which he was summoned to give evidence on behalf of the prosecution.

14. Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stands closed.

____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N

Dated 12.03.2025 KGM/PNS

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH. N

CRIMINAL PETITION No.1580 of 2025 Dated 12.03.2025

KGM/PNS