Dismissed¶52

State : Rep.by the Public Prosecutor v. Telugu Venkateswarlu

Andhra Pradesh HC19 Aug 2025CRLA/1224/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; Criminal Appeal No.1224 of 2009 (CRLA); State (by Public Prosecutor) v. Telugu Venkateswarlu; State appeal under S.378(3)&(1)/S.372/374(2)/378(4) Cr.P.C. against acquittal for offence under S.354 IPC; abatement of criminal appeal on death of accused (died 21.01.2004); condonation of delay of 2570 days under S.151 CPC (CRLAMP 1335/2009); acquittal judgment dated 19.07.2001 in S.C.No.123/2001, Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kurnool; decided 20-08-2025 by Justice T. Mallikarjuna Rao; appeal dismissed as abated.

What did the court decide?

The Court accepted the clarification furnished by the Investigating Officer, supported by the Village Revenue Officer's certificate, that Telugu Venkateswarlu and Chennammagari Venkateswarlu are the same individual. ¶46

State : Rep.by the Public Prosecutor Vs Telugu Venkateswarlu — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

APHC010461972009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.MALLIKARJUNA RAO

¶8

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1224 OF 2009

¶9

Appeal under Section 378(3) & (1) of Cr.P.C against the Judgment, dated 19-07-2001 passed in S.C.No.123 of 2001 on the file of the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kurnool, Kurnool District.

¶10

Between:

¶11

State: rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati.

¶12

...Appellant

¶13

AND

¶14

Telugu Venkateswarlu, S/o.Pullanna, aged 45 years, Seetharampuram Village, Bethamcherla Mandal.

¶15

...Accused/Respondent

¶16

Counsel for Appellant: Assistant Public Prosecutor

¶17

Counsel for Respondent: Sri Lakshmikanth Reddy Desai

¶18

The Court made the following:

¶19

APHC010461972009

¶20

[3369]

¶21

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶22

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶23

WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶24

PRESENT

¶25

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO

¶26

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1224/2009

¶27

Between:

¶28

1.STATE : REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT^OF ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD.

¶29

...APPELLANT

¶30

AND

¶31

1.TELUGU VENKATESWARLU, S/o.PULLANNA, SEETHARAMAPURAM VILLAGE, BETHAMCHERLA MANDAL.

¶32

...RESPONDENT

¶33

Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High Court may be pleased to present this Memorandum of Criminal Appeal against the Judgment in S.C.No. 123/2001 on the file^{ofthePrI.Asst.Sessions} Judge, Kurnool dated 19.07.2001 and prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to set aside the order of acquittal and convict the accused (respondent) for the offence with which he was charged.

¶34

lA NO: 1 OF 2009(CRLAMP 1335 OF 2009

¶35

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 2570 days in representing the above appeal presented against the Judgment in S.C.No. 123/2001 on the file of the Principal Assistant Sessions Judge,^ Kurnool.

¶36

Counsel for the Appellant:

¶37

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

¶38

¶39

Counsel for the Respondent:

¶40

1.LAKSHMIKANTH REDDY DESAI

¶41

The Court made the following:

¶42

JUDGMENT

¶43

This Criminal Appeal is filed by the Appellant/State, challenging the judgment, dated 19.07.2001, whereby the learned Principal Assistant Sessions Judge, Kurnool (for short, ‘the Sessions Judge’) acquitted the Respondent/Accused for the offence punishable under Section 354 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’).

¶44

Heard learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing Appellant/State and learned counsel for the Respondent/Accused.

¶45

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the Appellant/State submitted that the SubInspector of Bethamcherla Police Station had communicated by letter, informing him of the death of Telugu Venkateswarlu, also known as Chennammagari Venkateswarlu, who passed away on 21.01.2004. A copy of the Death Certificate has also been filed.

¶46

A perusal of the Death Certificate shows the name of the deceased as Chennammagari Venkateswarlu. When the Registry noted this discrepancy, the Investigating Officer clarified that Telugu Venkateswarlu is also known as Chennammagari Venkateswarlu. The Investigating Officer ftfrther stated that he conducted an inquiry in Seetharamapuram Village and obtained confirmation from the Village Revenue Officer regarding^{theaccused’sname.} The Village Revenue Officer confirmed that Telugu Venkateswarlu and Chennammagari Venkateswarlu, are indeed the same individual. In support of this, the Sub-Inspector of Police also submitted the Village Revenue Officer’s certificate.

¶47

Having considered the material on record and being^{satisfiedwiththe} clarification provided by the Investigating Officer, this Court is of the opinion

that, since the accused has passed away, the appeal^{isliabletobedismissed} as abated.

¶52