Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/2040/2009 of KORLA RAM MOHAN RAO, PEDDAPULIVARRU [V], GUNTUR DIST. Vs THE STATE, REP. BY P.P., HYDERABAD. on 10 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3560] FRIDAY, THE 11th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 2040/2009 Between: 1. KORLA RAM MOHAN RAO, PEDDAPULIVARRU [V], GUNTUR DIST., S/O. VENKATESWARA RAO
APHC010116862009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE 11th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 2040/2009
Between:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
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. KORLA RAM MOHAN RAO, PEDDAPULIVARRU [V], GUNTUR DIST., S/O. VENKATESWARA RAO @ LALU HINDU, AGRICULTURAL COOLIE R/O. PEDDAPULIVARRU VILLAGE, BHATTIPROLU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE REP BY P P HYDERABAD, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor Hyderabad, S.H.O., Bhattiprolu Police Station.
...RESPONDENT Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the CriminalRevisionCase, the High Court may be pleased toto allow the Criminal Revision Case and set aside the Judgment dated 13-04-2009 passed in S.C. No. 432 of 2008 on the file of the Assistant Sessions cum Senior Civil Judge Court, Repalle which was modified vide Judgment dated 27-11-2009 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 140 of 2009 on the file of the XI Additional District & Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Guntur at Tenali. IA NO: 1 OF 2009(CRLRCMP 2864 OF 2009 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the Judgment and Sentence dated 27-11-2009 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 140 of 2009 on the file of the XI Additional District & Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Guntur at Tenali and release the petition on bail.
SS,J Crl.R.C.No.2040 of 2009
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. G M SWAMULU Counsel for the Respondent:
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
SS,J Crl.R.C.No.2040 of 2009
The Court made the following Order:
Bailable Warrant issued by this Court was executed on 16.10.2025. At the time of releasing on bail, the petitioner has given an undertaking to the concerned learned Magistrate to appear before this Court on the date of hearing.
2. Inspite of such undertaking, none appears before this Court on behalf of the petitioner. Then, this Court proceeded to hear the matter on merit.
3. The petitioner was arrayed as an accused in S.C.No.432 of 2008 before learned Assistant Sessions Judge for a charge under Section 354 of I.P.C.. He was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, who found him guilty and directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of five (05) years and also to pay a fine of (Rupees Five Thousand only). In Criminal Appeal, the substantive sentence was modified to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three (03) years and fine of Rs.5,000/-. Hence, this Criminal Revision.
4. During the trial, the prosecution has examined as many as five witnesses, including the victim and two eye-witnesses. On the basis of the evidence of the witnesses, including the eye-witnesses, the learned Trial Court found petitioner guilty for the charge under Section 354 of I.P.C.. The learned Appellate Court has also scanned the evidence, including cross-examination of defence to the prosecution witnesses. The learned Appellate Court has affirmed the conviction of the petitioner. The victim was 16 years old at the time of the incident. Accordingly, her statement as well as
SS,J Crl.R.C.No.2040 of 2009
the statements of the other witnesses recorded before the Trial Court, were taken into consideration.
5. There is no illegality or impropriety in the impugned order.
6. Considering the aspect, I find no merit in the instant Criminal Revision and accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed as devoid of merit. The order of suspension of sentence passed by this Court during the pendency of the present Criminal Revision is hereby vacated.
7. The petitioner is directed to appear before the learned Trial Court within six (06) weeks from the date of passing of the order to serve out the remaining part of the sentence. Failing which, the learned Trial Court shall issue warrant of arrest against the petitioner to comply the order. The State is directed to intimate the order of this Court to petitioner.
8. Let a copy of this order shall be served upon the learned Trial Court for necessary compliance.
9. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ SUBHENDU SAMANTA, J
Date:11.09.2026 KPV
SS,J
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No:2040 of 2009
11.09.2026
KPV