Y.Pratap Reddy vs State,
2022 Latest Caselaw 1606 AP

            THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Crl.R.C.No.350 of 2013

ORDER:-

The police filed charge sheet under Sections. 392, 307, 341, 506 of I.P.C.

2. The Court of learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class,

Penukonda has taken cognizance of the same. As the witnesses failed to

undergo cross-examination, the learned Magistrate acquitted the

accused for the offences charge sheeted.

3. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the de facto complainant filed the

appeal under Section 372 of Criminal Procedure Code.

4. The learned appellate Court Judge while allowing the appeal has

observed that the trial Court has not eschewed the evidence of P.W.11

which was recorded in chief and further stated that for disposition of

judgment, the learned Judge ought to have taken the chief-examination

into consideration. As the learned trial Court Judge failed to do so and

on the said ground, the learned appellate Court Judge has allowed the

appeal and remanded back the matter to the trial Court for giving an

opportunity to the prosecution.

5. Aggrieved by the said judgment of the appellate Court, the

present Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioners/A-1 to A-3.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the trial Court

has giving several opportunities and issued BWs by following the

provisions of Section.350 of Criminal Procedure Code. Having no other

alternative the trial Court acquitted the accused and dismissed the

complaint.

7. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in "State of

Rajasthan V. Ikbal Hussen1," it is held that the right to speedy trial does

not protect an accused from all prejudicial effects caused by delay. Its

core concern is impairment of liberty. Possibility of prejudice is not

enough. Actual prejudice has to be proved. Thus, the Hon'ble Apex

Court has remanded back to the trial Court for trial of the case in the

similar circumstances.

8. Hence, relying on the above judgment, this Court declines to

interfere with the order of lower appellate Court.

9. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed confirming

the order of the lower appellate Court. Office is directed to send back

the record to the Court below.

Pending Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Date: 01-04-2022 EPS

(2004) 12 SCC 499

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

Crl.R.C.No.350 OF 2013

Date: 01-04-2022

EPS