Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/1732/2015 of BEPINA DHANALAKSHMI @ CHINNI, E.G.DIST. Vs P.P., HYD on 12 August 2026
for orders : - Date of pronouncement : 13.08.2026 Date of uploading : 14.08.2026 APHC010050862015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE 13th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1732 OF 2015 Between: Bepina
Date of reserved for orders : -
Date of pronouncement : 13.08.2026
Date of uploading : 14.08.2026
APHC010050862015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
THURSDAY, THE 13th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1732 OF 2015
Between:
Bepina Dhanalakshmi @ Chinni, W/o. Gangaraju, S.C. Mala by caste, R/o. Burugupudi now Residing At Virava Village, Pithapuram Mandal, East Godavari Dist., A.P.,
...Petitioner
AND
State of Andhra Pradesh,
Rep. by its Public Prosecutor
High Court at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and for the State of Andhra Pradesh
...Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioner: RAJU GUBBALA
Counsel for the Respondent PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
The Court made the following order:
THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1732 OF 2015
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.
ORDER:
This Criminal Revision Case is filed aggrieved by the judgment dated 20.08.2015 passed in Crl.A. No.198 of 2013 by the learned VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kakinada whereunder confirmed the sentence and judgment dated 08.04.2013 passed in C.C. No.315 of 2010 by the learned III Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada.
2. Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that as per the details of nominal rolls, revision petitioner has already undergone the period of sentence imposed by the trial Court as well as the appellate Court i.e., two years, as such, this Criminal Revision Case became infructuous.
3. Recorded the report regarding nominal rolls of the revision petitioner.
4. In the result, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as infructuous.
As a sequel thereto, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ SUNITHA GANDHAM, J
13.08.2026 knl