Dismissed¶28

Gurrala Parvathamma alias Revarthamra v. Gurrala Chinna Reddamma

Criminal Petition – dismissal for non-prosecution

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Mar 2026CRLP/1577/2020

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Special Original Jurisdiction; Criminal Petition No. 1577/2020; Dr. Justice Y. Lakshmana Rao (single Judge); decision dated 09.03.2026; petition dismissed for non-prosecution/default; no appearance by petitioners or counsel T Janardhan Rao; oldest matter on roster; interlocutory applications closed. No statutes or precedents cited; no substantive issue decided.

What did the court decide?

In view of the absence of representation and the failure to advance arguments, the Court held that the Petitioners are not interested in pursuing the present proceedings, and accordingly dismissed the Criminal Petition for non-prosecution, with interlocutory applications, if any, standing closed. ¶27

Gurrala Parvathamma alias Revarthamra Vs Gurrala Chinna Reddamma — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[3521]

¶2

APHC010114692020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

MONDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1577/2020

¶9

Between:

¶10

1.GURRALA PARVATHAMMA ALIAS REVARTHAMRA, , W/O. LATE CHINNA KONDAIAH, AGED 6 YEARS. OCC CULTIVATION

¶11

2.GURRALA REDDENNA REDDAIAH,, S/O. LATE CHINNA KONDAIAH, AGED 46 YEARS, 0CC CULTIVATION

¶12

3.GURRALA LAKSHMI DEVI,, W/O. REDDANNA @ REDDAIAH, AGED 41 YEARS, 0CC CULTIVATION PETITIONERS 1 AND 2 ARE R/O. D NO. 9611-11-1, PATHA UTUKURU HARIJANAWADA, CK DINNE MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT

¶13

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)

¶14

AND

¶15

1.GURRALA CHINNA REDDAMMA, W/O.LATE CHINNAIAH, AGED 42 YEARS, R/O. PATHA UTUKURU HARIJANAWAD, CK DINNE, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT

¶16

2.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BLDFS, AMARAVATI.

¶17

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

¶19

1.T JANARDHAN RAO

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):

¶21

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

¶22

¶23

2.SHAIK MOHAMMED ISMAIL

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶25

Despite the matter having been listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there has been no representation on behalf of the Petitioners. Even after affording sufficient opportunity, neither the Petitioners nor their Counsel have chosen to appear or prosecute the case.

¶26

It is also pertinent to observe that the present case constitutes one of the oldest matters pending on the roster. The non- appearance of the Petitioner, despite the long pendency of the matter, reflects a lack of diligence.

¶27

In view of the absence of representation and the failure to advance arguments, this Court is of the opinion that the Petitioners are not interested in pursuing the present proceedings.

¶28

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed for non- prosecution.

¶29

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

¶30

_________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J

¶31

Dt: 09.03.2026 VTS

Gurrala Parvathamma alias Revarthamra v. Gurrala Chinna Reddamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurrala Parvathamma alias Revarthamra v. Gurrala Chinna Reddamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Adapa Yesurani Vs Vangalapudi Chinna Babu

Sri. Mandapati Naga Manikanta Satya Siva Ramana Babu, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Nelli Parvathi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kalamkuntla Ramachandra Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Y.Mallikharjuna Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Chalasani Venkateswara Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh