Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/1188/2026 of Kommoju Venkata Parvateesam Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 7 October 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY, THE 8th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1188/2026 Between: 1. KOMMOJU VENKATA PARVATEESAM, S/O GURLINGACHARI, AGED ABOUT 56YEARS, GOLD SMITH,
APHC010536412026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 8th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1188/2026
Between:
1. KOMMOJU VENKATA PARVATEESAM, S/O GURLINGACHARI, AGED
ABOUT 56YEARS, GOLD SMITH, R/O D.NO. 2-3-3, RTC COMPLEX
ROAD, OPPOSITE SRI SURYA CHANDRA CHITS, PITHAPURAM, KAKINADA DISTRICT
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR,HIGH
COURT
OF
ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT
AMARAVATI, VELAGAPUDI,AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. KOMMOJU RAJESWARI, W/O VENKATA PARVATEESAM, AGED
ABOUT 53 YEARS,R/O PALLAPU VEEDHI, NEAR RAMALAYAM, YELESWARAM,YELESWARAM
MANDAL,
EAST
GODAVARI
DISTRICT.
3. KOMMOJU VINAYAKA VEERA VENKATA SATYA KALYAN, AGED
ABOUT 20 YEARS, R/O PALLAPU VEEDHI, NEAR RAMALAYAM, YELESWARAM,YELESWARAM
MANDAL,
EAST
GODAVARI
DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KOTA KRISHNA DEEPTHI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
4
Decisions referred to
In this index
2
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.
ORDER:
The Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Sections 438 & 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNSS’) challenging the interlocutory order dated 25.08.2026 in Crl.M.P.No.1448 of 2022 in M.C.No.08 of 2009 passed by the learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Prathipadu.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.
3. The order impugned, dated 25.08.2026, passed by the learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Prathipadu, in Crl.M.P.No.1448 of 2022 in M.C.No.08 of 2009, whereby an application filed by the Respondents under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity, ‘the Cr.P.C.’), seeking enhancement of maintenance, was allowed. Aggrieved by the said order, the Petitioner has preferred the present Revision Case.
4. Indeed, a revision against interlocutory order is not maintainable as per Section 397(2) of ‘the Cr.P.C.’ The order impugned is undoubtedly an interim order, as it merely allowed an application enhancing the maintenance to the Respondents.
5. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Sethuraman v. Rajamanickam1, Bhaskar Industries Ltd. v. Bhiwani Denim & Apparels Ltd.2, Girish Kumar Suneja v. CBI3, Amar Nath v. State of Haryana4, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that receiving of documents, summoning of the witnesses are all interlocutory in nature and against which no revision case is maintainable.
6. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sethuraman, Bhaskar Industries Ltd., Girish Kumar Suneja, Amar Nath supra the Criminal Revision case is not maintainable.
7. Hence, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Liberty is granted to the Petitioner to challenge the impugned order in appropriate proceedings, in accordance with law.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Dt: 08.10.2026 PRA
1(2009) 5 SCC 153 2(2001) 7 SCC 401 3(2017) 14 SCC 809 4(1977) 4 SCC 137
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1188/2026 Date: 08.10.2026
PRA