Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Maddineni Ravindra Babu, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 25 April, 2023
\ -.-
lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAR
TuESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL,
ll^/O THOUSAND AND T\^/ENTY THREE
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 310 OF 2023
Betwee n :
Maddineni Ravindra Babu, S/o M Thirupal Naidu, Aged about.54 years, R/o.
Jagadevipeta Village, lndukurupet Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, Andhra
Pradesh State.
...Petitioner
AND
1. The State ofAndhra Pradesh, rep.by its Public Prosecutor., High Court
at Amaravathi, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.
2. Pachava Umamaheswar Rao, S/o. P Vengaiah, Aged about. 38 years,
R/o.D.No.27-2-827, AC Nagar,` Nellore, SPSR Nellore District.
...Respondents
Revision filed under Section''397 & 401 of Cr.P.C. is filed praying that in
the circumstances stated in memorandum of grounds of Criminal Revision
Case, the High Court may be pleased-to allow the present Criminal Revision
by setting-aside the Judgment in Criminal Appeal No.321 of 2019 dated.
25.10.2021 on the file of lV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore in
confirming the conviction passed by the,I Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class,
Nellore in C.C No.129 of2018 (Old_C.C No.220 of2017) dated.30.09.2019.
lANO: 2OF2023
Petition under Section 482 oflCr.P.C is filed praying that in
the circumstances stated in memorandum of grounds of criminal revision
case, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the sentence in Judgment in
Criminal Appeal No.321 of 2019 datedi 2,5.10.2021 on the file of IV Additional
District & Sessions Judge, Nellore in confirming the conviction passed by the I
Addl. Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nellore in C.C No.129 of / 2018 (Old C.C
No.220 of 2017) dated:30,09.2019,,-,Pending d.lSPOSal Of CRLRC.No.310 of
2023, on the file of the High Court. --I,`L
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perus'lng the Petition and
memorandum of grounds of criminal revision case and upon hearing the
arguments of Sri Malireddy Gowtham,I Advocate for the Petitioner and Public
Prosecutor for the Respondent No.1 land Sri S.Ram Lakshman Reddy,
Advocate for the Respondent No.2, the Court made the following;
ORDER:
ff Today, when the case is ltake.n up, both the parties are present
before this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
counsel for 2nd respondent identifi'ed both the parties in the open Court,
This Court questioned the de facto complainant with regard to
compromise. He has categorically stated to that extent that he has
voluntarily entered into compromise with the petitioner herein. This
Court is satisfied with the identification of parties and voluntariness in
arriving at the compromise.
~'
Later, this Court has noti-ce`ld that I.A.s for compounding the
offence were not filed. In view of the said reason, the matter is posted to
27.04.2023 directing both the parties to filed I.A.s.
In view of the examination 9f the respective Parties before this
Court, their presence before this` Coflit has been dispensed with.
Post on 27.04.2023, under the'caption {for orders'."
U.Sri Devi
ASSISTANT GISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
To]
1. One CC to Sri. Malireddy Gowlham, Advocate [OPuC]
2. Two cos to Public Prosecutor, High Court ofAP [OUT]
3. Onespare copy
MM
HIGH COURT
SRKJ
DATED: 25/04/2023
NOTE: POST ON 27.O4.2023, UNDER THE CAPTION FOR ORDERS
ORDER
P../
/
I I.zy`^,*-'+ i-¢3:+ :;€h:`~b¢ ; :i ::iH:-t :;_I-h T=`rr:rf
r(al , ;.`3
CRLRC.No.310 of 2023 *#:;t.I I lt,ti[S
I.
\"\\`" .+i-;1
.I
`^'l ...`,
I,£!,. i::.. f`=,(d ¢q
-i,: i-I.;.:;;=`-H
DIRECTION
