Chowduru Eswara Reddy, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 591 AP

       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

               CRIMINAL APPEAL No.984 of 2016

JUDGMENT:-

                       (through virtual mode)

    This appeal was filed by the defacto-complainant/appellant,

challenging the judgment/order, dated 31.05.2016 passed by the

Principal Sessions Judge, Kadapa in Crla.No.71 of 2015 by which,

the appeal of the accused/respondent Nos.2 and 3 was allowed

and the judgment of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Kadapa, dated

15.05.2015 in S.C.441 of 2011 by which, the accused/respondent

Nos.2 and 3 were convicted of the offences punishable under

Sections 324 and 506 of IPC r/w Section 34 of IPC was set aside.

Memo of withdrawal vide U.S.R.No.3837 of 2022, dated

01.02.2022 has been filed with the prayer to permit the learned

counsel for the Defacto-complainant/Appellant to withdraw the

Crla.No.984 of 2016.

The said memo for withdrawal is being reproduced as under:

"MEMO FOR WITHDRAWAL

Posting of Crl.A.No.984 of 2016 for withdrawal

It is submitted that the above appeal was filed

questioning the judgment Crl.A.No.71 of 2015, dated 31-05-

2016 acquitting the 2nd and 3rd respondents for the offences

under Sections 324 and 506 of IPC r/w 34 of IPC 1860 and

confirm the order of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Kadapa

in S.C.No.441 of 2011, dated 15-05-2015. Now the

appellant instructed me to withdraw the above appeal. He

also addressed a letter to me to that effect. Letter for

posting of the above appeal for withdrawal is submitted to

the Registrar Judicial. Therefore I pray this Hon'ble Court

to permit the counsel for the appeal to withdraw the above

criminal appeal in the interest of justice.

Hence, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be

pleased to permit the counsel to withdraw the

Crl.A.No.984 of 2016 and do justice."

Sri K.S.Murthy, learned counsel for the defacto-

complainant/appellant, submits that the appellant does not want

to press the appeal any further and wants to withdraw the same.

Sri S.Venkata Sainath, learned Special Assistant Public

Prosecutor, submits that he has no instructions, if the judgment

under challenge, is also subject matter of the challenge by the

State or not.

Sri K.Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned counsel for the

respondent Nos.2 and 3 is also connected online.

In view of the memo for withdrawal and the submissions made

by the learned counsel for the appellant, the appeal is dismissed as

withdrawn.

However, it is clarified that this order shall not effect any other

proceeding if pending at the instance of the State or any other

person against the same judgment under challenge.

__________________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI,J Date: 03.02.2022 Scs 1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.984 of 2016

Date: 03.02.2022

Scs