The High Court disposed of the criminal appeal, observing that since accused persons were not parties, an amendment was not appropriate, leaving the appellant to file a fresh appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON'BLE Dr . JUSTI CE SHAMEEM AKTHER
Cr im in al Appeal No.1 0 9 4 of 2 0 1 7
JUDGMENT :
This Criminal Appeal, under Section 372(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is filed by the appellant, challenging the judgment, dated 10.05.2017, passed in Spl.S.C.No.34 of 2012 by the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Chittoor.
2 . Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State and perused the record.
3 . It is brought to the notice of this Court that by oversight, the accused are not made as parties to this Criminal Appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission to get them on record by filing an amendment petition in this Criminal Appeal. It is not appropriate to allow such kind of amendment in this Criminal Appeal. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh appeal.
4 . With the above observation, this Criminal Appeal is disposed of.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Appeal, shall stand closed.
08th November, 2017 Bvv
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Dr . SHAMEEM AKTHER, J
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shameem Akther
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
