The High Court dismissed a criminal revision case for non-prosecution. The petitioner failed to appear or file representations despite multiple adjournments and listed hearings under 'for dismissal', indicating a lack of interest in prosecuting the case.
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.
[329e I
IN THE HIGHCOURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY,THE TWENTY SECONDDAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSANDANDTWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTICEE.V. VENUGOPAL
CRIMINALREVISIONCASE NO .. 11270F 2014
Between:
ThumoariUshaRani,W/oVenkatanarayan,agedabout.36years,Private i;;ilIyA, i+,di,i6'intJiriaiGC"ionv,New Pa-ivancha'Khammam District'
...Petitioner / Petitioner'Appellant
AND
...Respondents
Revision filedunder Section 397/401 of CrPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of the criminalRevision Case, the HighCourt may be pleasedto aggrieved againstthe orders dt.5-5-2014made in Crl. M.P. No'130/2014Crl A No' t2O14 on the fileof the Court of the PrincipalSessions Judge,Warangal' Warangal District'
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(CRLRCMP. NO:1760 oF 20 141
Petition underSection 482 of Cr'PC praying that in the circumstances stated in theaffidavit filed in support of the petition'the High Court may be pleased togrant stayof all furtherproceedingsin pursuanceof the Judgment and sentencedated made in CC NO28412010 on the file of the court of Vll Additional JudicialFirst classMagistrate, warangal including execution of NBWs against thepetitioner pendingdisposal of the above Criminal Revision'
Counsel for the Petitioner(s): SRl. A JAGANNADHA RAO Counsel for the Respondenis: pUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Counsel for the R.espondents: 83g0/M VENUGOPAL RAO The Court made the following order:-
1
THE HONOURABLESRI .'USTICEE.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINALREVISION CASE No.1 L27 oF.2014
ORDER:
There was norepresentationon behalf of the petitioneron 12.06.2024.This Court directedthe Registry to list this matteron 19.06.2024 underthe caption, "for dismissal"' There was no representationon behalf of the petitioner on 03 '07 '2024 ' 04.07.2024,O6.09.2024and,1'5'lO'2024despitelistingthe matter under"for dismissal"' Even today i'e'' on 22 'lO '2024 there is norepresentationon behalf of the petitioner'This shows that the petitioneris not evincingany interestto prosecutethe case.
2 Accordingly, thisCriminalRevision Case is dismissed for non-prosecution.
MiscellaneousPetitions, pendingif any' shall stand closed'
Sd/. T. KRISHNAKUMAR DEPUTY GrsT
//TRUE COPY//
SECTIONOFFICER
To,
VCikam
ru-
! I
i I
HIGH COURT
DATED:2211012024
ORDER
CRLRC.No.1127 of 2014
..-':=:
1 *ie sr ATE
7o
o 16 JIN ?sl5
tt
o ,
i oEstrJ c,
r-:;::
DISMISSING THE CRLRC AS NON PROSECUTION
€ Lodtl; "V ;\,\r
Thumoari Usha Rani
Kuchana Thirupathi
The State of Andhra Pradesh
E.V. Venugopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
