State of A.P. Vs Duppatla Chinnababu

Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High Court may be pleased to To present this Memorandum of Criminal Appeal against the Judgment in C.C.No.444 of 2005 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikakulam, dated 29th day of March, 2008 and prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to set aside the order of acquittal and convict the accused(Respondents) for the offences with which they were charged.

¶19

BVLNC,J

¶20

2

¶21

Crl.A.No.1437 of 2009

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2009(CRLAMP 569 OF 2009

¶23

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 "246 days" in presenting the appeal against the order of acquittal of the accused/respondents in C.C.No.444/2005 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikakulam, dated 29.03.2008.

¶24

Counsel for the Apellant:

¶25

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶26

Counsel for the Respodent(S):

¶27

1.A RAVI SHANKAR

¶28

BVLNC,J

¶29

3

¶30

Crl.A.No.1437 of 2009

¶31

The Court made the following JUDGMENT:

¶32

Heard learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the State/ appellant and Sri A.Ravi Shankar, learned counsel for the respondents/ accused.

¶33

The question involved in the appeal preferred by the State is “Whether the appeal is maintainable before this Court?”

¶34

Admittedly, the impugned judgment dated 29.03.2008 in C.C.No.444 of 2005, under challenge was rendered by learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class at Srikakulam. He tried the accused for the offences under Sections 498A, 494, 420 and 506 IPC. On considering the entire evidence on record, learned Magistrate found that prosecution failed to prove the charges leveled against the accused. Consequently, the learned Magistrate recorded acquittal under Section 248(1) CrPC. Challenging the judgment of the learned Magistrate, appeal came to be filed before this Court.

¶35

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would fairly concede that in the light of the Section 378(1)(a) Cr.P.C., the appeal be presented to the Court of Sessions as it is from an order of acquittal passed by a Magistrate in respect of a cognizable and non bailable offences. In that view of the matter, the appeal may be returned to present before appropriate forum in accordance with law.

¶36

BVLNC,J

¶37

4

¶38

Crl.A.No.1437 of 2009

¶39

In the light of the above submissions, as the appeal be presented to the Court of Sessions and not before this Court, the appeal shall be returned for presentation before appropriate forum in accordance with law.

¶40

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. Registry is directed to return the bundle to the appellant for filing before appropriate forum in accordance with law.

¶41

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

¶42

______________________________ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI

09.02.2026

Dvs

BVLNC,J

5