Dismissed¶¶33

Matta Basava Nagarjuna Rao, Krishna Dist. v. Sudeena Srinivas, E.G.Dist. & Ano

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Sept 2025CRLRC/1145/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Matta Basava Nagarjuna Rao v. Sudeena Srinivas and State of A.P.; Criminal Revision Case No.1145 of 2015; High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; Justice T. Mallikarjuna Rao; decided 25.09.2025; Sections 397, 401 and 391 Cr.P.C.; Section 151 CPC; additional evidence; Crl.M.P.No.310 of 2014; Crl.A.No.144 of 2011 disposed 30.01.2024; dismissed as infructuous; X Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam; interim orders vacated; Narasimha Rao Gudiseva; Public Prosecutor (AP).

What did the court decide?

With the disposal of the main appeal Crl.A.No.144 of 2011 on 30.01.2024, the cause in the Criminal Revision Case did not survive for adjudication and the matter became infructuous. ¶¶32

Matta Basava Nagarjuna Rao, Krishna Dist. Vs Sudeena Srinivas, E.G.Dist. & Ano — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[3369]

¶2

APHC010006892015

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1145 OF 2015

¶8

Between:

¶9

MATTA BASAVA NAGARJUNA RAO, S/O. LATE RANGA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, AQUA CULTURE, R/O PEDATHUMMIDI VILLAGE, BANTUMILLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

SUDEENA SRINIVAS, S/O. SESHAGIRI RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, BUSINESS, R/O DOSAKAYALAPUDI, KODURU MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶13

THE STATE OF A.P, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & A.P. HYDERABAD.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Revision filed under Section 397 and 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 in Crl.M.P.No. 310 of 2014 in Crl. Appeal No.144 of 2011 dated 21-04-2015 on the file of the Court of the X Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Krishna, at Machilipatnam consequently allow Petition and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court

¶16

IA NO: 1 OF 2015(CRLRCMP 1828 OF 2015

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

grant stay of all further proceedings in Crl. Appeal No.144 of 2011 on the file of the Court of the X Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Krishna, at Machilipatnam pending disposal of the above Revision Case and pass other order or orders as deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶21

1.NARASIMHA RAO GUDISEVA

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶23

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

¶24

The Court made the following:

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

1. This Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘the Cr.P.C.’) against the order dated 21.04.2015 passed in Crl.M.P.No.310 of 2014 in Crl.A.No.144 of 2011 on the file of learned X Additional District and Sessions Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam, wherein the petition filed under Section 391 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner herein seeking to receive the document as additional evidence and the same is dismissed.

¶27

2. Heard and perused the record.

¶28

3. As seen from the record, this Criminal Revision Case is filed against the order dated 21.04.2015 passed in Crl.M.P.No.310 of 2014 in Crl.A.No.144 of 2011. The Crl.M.P.No.310 of 2014 is filed by the petitioner herein seeking to receive the document as additional evidence and the said petition is dismissed. Against the said orders, the present revision is preferred.

¶29

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that according to his instructions, the Crl.A.No.144 of 2011 was disposed on 30.01.2024.

¶30

5. Recording the said submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the disposal of main Crl.A.No.144 of 2011 on 30.01.2024 as

¶31

¶32

the cause does not survive for adjudication and the matter would become infructuous.

¶33

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as infructuous.

¶34

Interim orders granted earlier, if any, shall stand vacated and the miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶35

____________________________ JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO

¶36

Date: 25.09.2025 MS

¶37

¶38

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO

¶39

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1145 of 2015

¶40

Date: 25.09.2025

¶41

Matta Basava Nagarjuna Rao, Krishna Dist. v. Sudeena Srinivas, E.G.Dist. & Ano

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Matta Basava Nagarjuna Rao, Krishna Dist. v. Sudeena Srinivas, E.G.Dist. & Ano

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramayanam Venkata Subbaiah, Kadapa Dt., Vs Ramayanam Rajyalakshmi, Kadapa & 2 Otrs, Rep Pp.

G.R.Mohan @ Mohan Rao, Krishna District Vs Koneru Satyanarayana, Patamata, Vijayawada & Anr, Rep.by Pp.

Manukonda Babu Rao, Wg.Dt., Vs Smt. Manukonda Manga, Wg.Dt & 3 Otrs, Rep Pp.

B.Subbarayudu, Kadapa City Ysr Dt., Vs State of Ap., Rep Pp and Anr.

Mallsetti Eswara Prasad, E.G.Dt., Vs Tirupathi Venkayamma, W.G.Dt & 2 Otrs, Rep Pp.

Kaki Purushottam Venkata Satya Prasad, E.G.Dist. & 2 Othrs Vs Sho, I Town L&O P.S., Kakinada