Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLA/568/2011 of KAVURI KRISHNA KUMARI, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT Vs NARISETTY PURNACHANDRA SEKHAR, GUNTUR POST AND ANR on 9 October 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3605] SATURDAY, THE 10th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 568/2011 Between: 1. KAVURI KRISHNA KUMARI, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, S/o. PUNNAIAH R/o. DWARAKA NAGAR,
APHC010586802011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
SATURDAY, THE 10th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 568/2011
Between:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. KAVURI KRISHNA KUMARI, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, S/o. PUNNAIAH R/o. DWARAKA NAGAR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT AND
1. NARISETTY PURNACHANDRA SEKHAR GUNTUR POST AND ANR, S/o. VENU GOPALA, HINDU D.No. 8-572, BHARGAVPET, MANGALAGIRI POST AND MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE STATE OF A P, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD.
...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Appellant:
1. S SYAMSUNDER RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR CRIMINAL APPEAL No.568 of 2011 The Court made the following JUDGMENT:
1. The learned counsel for the Appellant submits that he has no instructions. On 15.12.2018, the matter was listed under the caption “For Orders”.
2. The record reveals that the Appellant has failed to serve notice on the Respondent/Accused for all these years.
3. In the circumstances, it appears that the Appellant is not interested in prosecuting the appeal against the Accused under Section 138 of N.I.Act.
4. The settled law is that the Criminal Appeals shall be disposed on merits (see Hon’ble Full Bench Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Bani Singh and others v. State of U.P.1, (1996)4 SCC 720), but when the Appellant could not serve notice on the Accused for all these years. In the absence of service of notice on the Accused, this Court cannot proceed to hear the matter and dispose on merits without affording an opportunity to the Accused.
5. Thus, this Court could not decide the Appeal on the impugned judgment in the absence of service of notice on Respondent /Accused. Thus, the Appeal is liable not only to be dismissed for non-prosecution by invoking inherent powers, but also to be held that the Appellant contributed to the pendency of the Appeal for all these years by failing to pursue to serve notice 1 (1996) 4 SCC 720
on the Accused. Thus, the Appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution in the circumstances. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed.
_________________________ JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR Dated : 10.10.2026 CHD
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.568 of 2011 Date: 10th October, 2026
CHD