Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/853/2014 of HARI BABU AND 3 OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF AP., REP BY ITS P.P AND 2 OTHERS on 26 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3560] MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 853/2014 Between: 1. HARI BABU AND 3 OTHERS, S/O. G. KUMARA SWAMI,
APHC010089222014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 853/2014
Between:
1. HARI BABU AND 3 OTHERS, S/O. G. KUMARA SWAMI, AGED
ABOUT 27 YEARS, OCC: TIPPER DRIVER,
2. G. KUMARASWAMI,, S/O. RAGHAVA GOUDA, AGED ABOUT 50
YEARS,
3. SMT. KALAVATHI,, W/O. G. KUMARASWAMI, AGED ABOUT 45
YEARS,
4. SMT. RAJAMMA,, W/O. SEENYGADU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, ALL
ARE RESIDENTS OF GONDIVALLA VILLAGE, 135 KAMMAPALLE
POST, YADAMARRI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF AP REP BY ITS P P AND 2 OTHERS, REP. BY ITS
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P., HYDERABAD.
2. MRS SELVI, W/O. HARIBABU, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O.
GONDIVALLA VILLAGE, 155 KAMMAPALLE POST, YADAMARRI
MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
3. DELLI SRI BEING MINOR, REP. BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL
GUARDINA OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
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 toaggreived by the Judgment dt. 06-2-2014 passed in CrlA.No.112/2012 on the file of the Ist Additional District & Sessions Judge, Chittoor by confirming the order dt. 09-4- 2012 passed DVC.NO.17/2012 on the file of the court of the III Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittoor .
IA NO: 1 OF 2014(CRLRCMP 1311 OF 2014
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 dispense with the filing of the certified copy of the order in DVC.NO.17/2012, dt. 09-4-2012 on the file of the III Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittoor andpass.
IA NO: 2 OF 2014(CRLRCMP 1361 OF 2014
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 Stay of all further proceedings of the
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.
Judgment
passed in Crl.A.No.112/2012, dated 06.02.2014 on the file of the court of the I Addl. District 86 Sessions Judge, Chittoor, Chittoor district as confirming the Judgment passed in D.V.C. No. 17 of 2012, dated 09.04.2012 on the file of the III Addl. Judicial first Class Magistrate, Chittoor pending disposal of the Criminal Revision Case, and pass such other order or orders as this Honourable court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 853/2014 The Court made the following:
None appears on behalf of the petitioners.
The instant Criminal Revision Case has been preferred against the order passed by learned Jurisdictional Magistrate under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The petitioners are the respondents before the learned Trial Court.
It had been contended on an earlier occasion by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the matter has been settled outside the Court. A written communication from one of the petitioners to the learned counsel for the petitioners has been placed on record. It appears that petitioner No. 1 intends to withdraw the matter. Petitioners are the relatives of respondent Nos.2 and 3 against whom impugned order was passed. As the petitioners are not turning up, a written instructions was ordered to be filed from all petitioners.
Conduct of the petitioners itself shows they are not interested to proceed further.
Taking note of the written instructions from the petitioner No.1. The Instant Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as withdrawn.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
Dated:27.04.2026 SSA