Cheedella Sudhakara Rao, Vs the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd. — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Cheedella Sudhakara Rao, Vs the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd. — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Compromise recorded and made part of the record; conviction and sentence passed in Crl.A.No.175 of 2009 by the District Sessions Judge, Prakasam Division, Ongole, set aside; revisionist/Accused No.1 acquitted; Criminal Revision Case No.421 of 2010 disposed of in terms of the compromise; no order as to costs; pending applications, if any, closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the compromise arrived at between the petitioner (Accused No.1) and the 2nd respondent/complainant may be recorded and, consequently, whether the conviction and sentence passed in Crl.A.No.175 of 2009 by the District Sessions Judge, Prakasam Division, Ongole, may be set aside with acquittal of the revisionist.

Court's answer

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the 2nd respondent and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, the compromise between the parties is recorded and made part of the case.

Ratio / Principle

The compromise petitions (I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2023) are allowed, setting aside the conviction and sentence passed in Crl.A.No.175 of 2009 on the file of the District Sessions Judge, Prakasam Division, Ongole, and acquitting the revisionist/Accused No.1.

Key takeaways

Consequently, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of in terms of the compromise, with no order as to costs.ratio¶34
As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Revision (Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati) — Compromise — I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2023 in Crl.R.C.No.421 of 2010 filed by the petitioner, who was Accused No.1, and the 2nd respondent/complainant for recording a compromise and setting aside the conviction and sentence passed in Crl.A.No.175 of 2009 on the file of the learned District Sessions Judge, Prakasam Division, Ongole — petitions accompanied by a joint memo of compromise signed by the parties and their counsel; parties filed photo copies of their Aadhar cards in proof of identity and were present in Court — after hearing learned counsel for both sides and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, the compromise was recorded and made part of the case — petitions allowed: conviction and sentence in Crl.A.No.175 of 2009 set aside and the revisionist/A1 acquitted — Criminal Revision Case disposed of in terms of the compromise; no order as to costs; pending applications, if any, stood closed. (Dr. Justice Y. Lakshmana Rao, J.; dated 03.02.2025)

[3521]

APHC010602502010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 421/2010

Between:

Cheedella Sudhakara Rao,

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Ap Rep By Its Pp Hyd and Others

...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

2.MULLA SOHAIL SHAREEF

The Court made the following:

2

Dr.YLR, J Crl.R.C.No.421 of 2010

HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2023

in &

Crl.R.C.421 of 2010

ORDER:

The present applications are filed for compromise by the petitioner and 2^nd respondent respectively along with an affidavit and requested that a compromise may be recorded and set aside the conviction and sentence passed in Crl.A.No.175 of 2009 on the file of the learned District Sessions Judge, Prakasam Division, Ongole.

The petitions are also accompanied with a joint memo of compromise signed by the petitioner who was Accused No.1 in the case and the 2^nd respondent/complainant along with the signatures of counsels for the petitioner and the 2^nd respondent. The petitioner and the 2^nd respondent submitted that they had voluntarily compromised the case and requested to allow the petitions. The parties have filed photo copies of their Aadhar cards in support of their identity.

The petitioner and the 2^nd respondent/complainant in the revision are present.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the 2^nd respondent and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, the Compromise is recorded, which is accordingly made part of this case.

3

Dr.YLR, J Crl.R.C.No.421 of 2010

The petitions are allowed setting aside the conviction and sentence passed in Crl.A.No.175 of 2009 on the file of the District Sessions Judge, Prakasam Division, Ongole, and acquitting the revisionist/A1.

Consequently, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of in terms of the compromise. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J

Dt: 03.02.2025 KMS

4

Dr.YLR, J Crl.R.C.No.421 of 2010

117

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 421/2010

03.02.2024

KMS