Dismissed¶31

Nandi Varalakshmi v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC4 Dec 2025CRLRC/2290/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati; Criminal Revision Case No.2290 of 2018; Sections 397 and 401 CrPC revision; challenge to dismissal of discharge petition under Section 227 CrPC; Crl.M.P.No.311 of 2015 in S.C.No.64 of 2015; Assistant Sessions Judge, Avanigadda, Krishna District; revision dismissed as infructuous on counsel's submission; interim orders vacated; miscellaneous applications closed; IA No.1 of 2018 condonation of 96 days' delay; IA No.2 of 2018 stay of proceedings; Justice T. Mallikarjuna Rao; judgment dated 05.12.2025.

What did the court decide?

Recording the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter had become infructuous, the Court dismissed the Criminal Revision Case as infructuous. ¶31

Nandi Varalakshmi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[3369]

¶2

APHC010628852018

¶3

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

¶4

FRIDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 2290/2018

¶7

Between:

¶8

NANDI VARALAKSHMI, OCC. ADVOCATE, R/O.DOOR NO.1-16 202, SAMSAKRUTI TOWNSHIP POCHARAM VILLAGE, GHATKESAR MANDAL R.R.DISTRICT, TELANGANA

¶9

N.PAVAN SIVARAMA KRISHNA, OCC. PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O.MAGISTRATE COLONY DORANADA, RANCHI, JHARKAND STATE

¶10

N.VAMSI KRISHNA, OCC. PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O.DOOR NO.A-16 202, SAMSKRUTI TOWNSHIP, POCHARAM VILLAGE, GHATKESAR MANDAL R.R.DISTRICT, TELANGANA

¶11

...PETITIONER(S)

¶12

AND

¶13

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

¶14

KADIYALA RAMA KRISHNA, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O.DOOR NO.24-A-9-9/ 1 ASHOKNAGAR, ELURU, W.G.DISTRICT, AP

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased toThe above named petitioners beg to present the above Criminal Revision questioning the Order in Crl.M.P.No.311/2015 in S.C.No.64/2015 dt.08-02- 2018 on the file of the court

¶17

of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Avanigadda, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh, for the following among other.

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶19

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 condone the delay of 96 days in filing the Crl.R.C. and pass

¶20

IA NO: 2 OF 2018

¶21

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 grant stay of all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioners/A2 to A4 in S.c.No.64/2015 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Avanigadda, Krishna District, AP, pending disposal of the above Crl.R.C. and pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶23

1.TURAGA SAI SURYA

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

¶26

O R D E R:

¶27

This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner/accused No.4 under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘the Cr.P.C.’) against the Order dated 08.02.2018 passed in Crl.M.P.No.311 of 2015 in S.C.No.64 of 2015 on the file of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Avanigadda, Krishna District, (for short, ‘the trial Court’).

¶28

2. Heard and perused the record.

¶29

3. As seen from the record, this Criminal Revision Case has been filed against the order dated 08.02.2018 passed in Crl.M.P.No.311 of 2015 in S.C.No.64 of 2015. The Crl.M.P.No.311 of 2015 has been filed by the petitioners/A2 to A4 under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. to discharge them from S.C.No.64 of 2015. By impugned order dated 08.02.2018, the trial Court dismissed the petition, by ascertaining some reasons. Against the said order, the petitioners/A2 to A4 herein preferred the revision.

¶30

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter has become infructuous and requests to close this matter.

¶31

5. Recording the said submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as infructuous.

¶32

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

¶33

_____________________________ JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO

¶34

Date: 05.12.2025 M K K

¶35

255