Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/460/2026 of N BALAJI KUMAR REDDY Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 26 April 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION Between: 1. N BALAJI KUMAR REDDY, S/O CHANDRASEKHAR REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 43
APHC010193562026
IN THE H
(
MONDAY,THE
TWO T
THE HONOURABLE DR
CRIMINAL
Between:
1. N BALAJI KUMAR RE
AGED
ABOUT
BANGALORE, KARNA
1. THE STATE OF A
PROSECUTOR,
AMARAVATI, GUNTU
2. P ANURADHA, W/O
ABOUT 43 YEARS, U
3. N DHATRI SREE, D/
ABOUT 14 YEARS.
AND
MOTHER.
RESPONDENT NOS.
399, SRI VENKATES
402, PRASANTHI
ANDHRA PRADESH -
Revision filed under
circumstances
stated
in
CriminalRevisionCase, the
the records in Crl.M.P.No.
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
E TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL
THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
R JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PR
L REVISION CASE NO: 460/2026
EDDY, S/O CHANDRASEKHAR REDDY
YEARS.
RESIDING
AT
KOD
ATAKA STATE - 560067.
...PE
AND
ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS
HIGH
COURT
OF
ANDHRA
P
UR DISTRICT - 522237.
N. BALAJI KUMAR REDDY, HIND
UNEMPLOYED,
/O N. BALAJI KUMAR REDDY, HIND
MINOR, REP. BY HER NATURAL G
RESPONDENT
NO.2
-
P.
AN
2 AND 3 ARE RESIDING AT D.NO.
SWARA RESIDENCY, 4TH FLOOR,
NAGAR, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI D
- 517501.
...RESPON
Section 397/401 of CrPC praying t
n
the
affidavit
filed
in
support
High Court may be pleased toPleased
219/2025 by setting aside dismissed for
RATAPA
Y, HINDU,
EGIHALLI,
TITIONER
S PUBLIC
PRADESH,
DU, AGED
DU, AGED
GUARDIAN
NURADHA,
18-36-84-
FLAT NO.
DISTRICT,
NDENT(S):
that in the
t
of
the
d to call for
r default on
02.04.2026 on the file of Ld. Trial Court Family Judge- cum- V Addl. District Judge, Tirupati, by restoring the same CrI.M.P number 219/2025 on file with a direction to conduct enquiry/trial as directed by this Hon'ble Court in Crl.P.No.696/2026 Order Dt.31/01/2026 and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026
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 Pleased to Dispense with the Certified copy of Docket order in Crl.M.P.
219/2025 in FCOP. 44/2017 and to pass
IA NO: 2 OF 2026
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 May be pleased to stay all further proceedings, including execution of Non- Bailable Warrants, in F.C.O.P. No. 44 of 2017 on the file of the Family Judge- cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati and to Pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.PARTY IN PERSON
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 460/2026
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 seeking to set aside the order dated 02.04.2026 passed in Crl.M.P. No. 219 of 2025 on the file of the learned Family Judge-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, and to restore the said petition with a direction to conduct enquiry/trial as earlier directed by this learned Court in Crl.P. No. 696 of 2026, dated 31.01.2026.
2. Heard the petitioner, who appeared in person, and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing on behalf of the State.
3. The petitioner, (party-in-person), would submit that due to his incarceration, he could not effectively contest the petition filed by his wife for enforcement of the order, and consequently, he lost his employment. He would further submit that he had filed Crl.M.P. No. 219 of 2025 seeking alteration of the order on account of change in circumstances, but the same was dismissed for default. It is his contention that due to apprehension of arrest, he was unable to appear before the Court, which resulted in dismissal of his petition for default. He therefore seeks liberty to file an appropriate application before the trial Court for restoration of the said petition, to work out his remedy, subject to part-payment of arrears.
4. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the Court may pass appropriate orders.
5. Considering the submissions made, this Court finds no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. However, the petitioner is granted liberty to file a fresh application before the learned trial Court for restoration of his petition dismissed for default, and to pursue his remedy in accordance with law.
It is further directed that, in the meanwhile, the petitioner shall deposit one-fourth (1/4th) of the due amount, if any, before the trial Court, as to prove his bona fides.
_________________________________________
Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 27.04.2026 KKV
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No: 460/2026 Dt.27.04.2026
KKV