CC/1793/2026 of OGIRALA VENKATA SAI SUNIL MANOHAR Vs OGIRALA @ CHORAGUDI KRISHNA SWOMYA on 30 April 2026

1. OGIRALA VENKAT AGED ABOUT. 40 COLONY, 4TH ROA

1. OGIRALA CHORAG Sai Sunil Manohar, Private Employee a Priya Foods Offset, 31, MSP Mango Me Budigere Cross, Bo Petition under Secti that in the circumstances be pleased to Ini Respondent/Contemnor, wilful, deliberate, and co passed by this Hon'ble Respondent/Contemnor accordance with the pro Article 215 of the Constitu E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) DAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT RI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVEND BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR G NTEMPT CASE NO: 1793/2026 TA SAI SUNIL MANOHAR, S/O. SE YEARS, PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/O AD, PATAMATA, VIJAYAWADA - 520 AND GUDI KRISHNA SWOMYA, W/o. O D/o. Choragudi Gopi Krishna, Aged a and Housewife, D.No.8-78/4, Saibab Poranki, Krishna District-521137. (A eadows, Ph 2, 1st Cross Road, Nime mmenahalli, Bangalore - 560049) .. ons 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts A s stated in the affidavit file herein the tiate contempt proceedings Ogirala @ Choragudi Krishna Sw ontumacious violation of the order da Court in W.P. No. 36437 of 2025 for committing Civil and Crimina ovisions of the Contempt of Courts ution of India Pass DESH

DRANATH ROY GEDELA ESHU KUMAR, O.NO.166, RTC 0010. ...PETITIONER Ogirala Venkata bout. 35 Years, a Temple, C/o. Also residing at. ekaipura Road, .CONTEMNOR Act 1971 praying High Court may against the womya, for her ated 07.01.2026 and Punish the al Contempt in Act, 1971, and

CMR,J & GTK,J C.C.No.1793 of 2026

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. V.RAVINDHAR Counsel for the Contemnor:

1.

CMR,J & GTK,J C.C.No.1793 of 2026

The Court made the following: ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. As per order dated 07.01.2026, passed in writ petition No.36437 of 2025, this Court passed an interim order, directing respondent No.4 therein, not to leave the Country, along with the corpus, without prior permission of this Court.

3. Alleging that respondent No.4 has been leaving the Country without prior permission of the Court, with the corpus that the present contempt case is filed.

4. However, at the time of hearing this contempt case, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that respondent No.4 is now not leaving the Country with the corpus and she is very much available in the Country.

5. Therefore, recording the said submission, the Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

_____________________________ JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA

Date: 01.05.2026 MDP