Adabala Venkata Swamy Naidu, Eg.Dt., v. the State of Ap., Rep Pp and Anr.

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Mar 2025CRLRC/1137/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court criminal revision dismissed as abated on death of the revisionist; challenge to concurrent conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881; petitioner Adabala Venkata Swamy Naidu; respondents the State of Andhra Pradesh (rep. by Public Prosecutor) and others; counsel N. Siva Reddy (petitioner), V. Mallik and Public Prosecutor (AP) (respondents); Dr. Y. Lakshmana Rao, J.; decided 10.03.2025; CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1137 OF 2016.

What did the court decide?

Recording the submissions that the Revisionist had expired and his legal representatives were not interested to come on record, the Court dismissed the Criminal Revision Case as abated. ¶22-23

Adabala Venkata Swamy Naidu, Eg.Dt., Vs the State of… — Cheque Dishonour | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

APHC010041562016

¶2

[3521]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

MONDA Y , THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO T H OUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

¶7

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1137 OF 2016

¶8

Between:

¶9

Adabala Venkata Swamy N aidu, Eg.dt.,

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Ap Rep Pp And Anr and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶13

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶14

1.N SIVA REDDY

¶15

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶16

1.V MALLIK

¶17

2.PUBLIC PROSECUT O R (AP)

¶18

The Court made the following Order:

¶19

The Revision was fil e d against the concurrent conviction for the alleged

¶20

Offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶21

Sri N.Siva Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, sub m its that the Revisionist has expired, Legal representatives of the petition e r are not interested to come on re c ord. Therefore, urged to dismiss this revision as abated.

¶22