The High Court dismissed a criminal revision filed by appellants to examine an expert witness because the underlying main case had been acquitted in 2023, rendering the revision infructuous.
Present criminal revision case dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
SATURDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V SRINIVAS
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 2039 OF 2014
Between:
...Petitioners/Appellants/Accused 2 & 3
AND
...RESPONDENTS
(Respondents 3 to 5 are not necessary parties)
...Respondents/Petitioners/Accused1,4 & 5
Revision fited under Sections 397&401 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to set aside the order Dt. 25-07-2014 passed in CrI. mp. 80of 2013 of C.A. 313 of 2012 on the file of Family Court Judge Cum IX Additional District judge, Rajahmundry hereby permitting the Petitioner/Accusedto examine S.N Mahandru, 62-1 J.D Block, Peetapuram, New Delhi Expert ad Additional evidence by summoning him and to give evidence before Family Court Judge Cum IX Additional District Judge, Rajahmundry.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(CRLRCMP. NO: 3355 OF 20141
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased To stay all further proceedings in C.A. 313 of 2012 in C.C 64 of 2010 on the file of the Family Court Judge Cum IX AddI District Judge, Rajahmundry.
Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. NOMOS VISTAS THE LAWYERS
Counsel for the Respondents: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following: ORDER
\ \
1 I
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SRINIVAS
Criminal Revision Case No.2039 of 2014
ORDER:
The present Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 against the order, dated 25.07.2014 in Crl.M.P.No.80 of 2013 in C.A.No.313 of2012 passed by the learned Judge Family Court-cum-IX Additional District & Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry, wherein the petition filed by the petitioners/accusedunderSection 391 (1) of Cr.P.C., to examine S.N.Mahandry, 62-A,J.D.Block, Peetampura, New Delhi, expert as additional evidence by summoning him and to give evidence was dismissed bythetrial Court.
- As per the information furnished by the Registry, themain case i.e., C.A.No.313 of 2012 was allowed on 31.08.2023 by acquitting the accused and therefore, the cause inthepresent criminal revision case does not survive and the matterwould become infructuous.
- Accordingly, the present Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as infructuous.
/
2
■f
n
Interim orders granted earlier, if any, shall standvacated. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any
shall stand closed.
Sd/- M.RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR
/
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To,
Pmg
ns
K
X
I
HIGH COURT
DATED:23/11/2024
ORDER
CRLRC.No.2039 of 2014
DISMISSING THE CRLRC AS INFRUCTUOUS
1 provisions across 1 enactments
G. Rayappa Reddy
Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Ltd
The State
The State of A. P.
V Srinivas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
