Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/987/2017 of SHAIK BASHA, PRAKASAM DT., Vs JONNALAGADDA THIRUPATHAIAH, PRAKASAM & ANR, REP PP., on 8 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3560] THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 987/2017 Between: 1. SHAIK BASHA, PRAKASAM DT.,, S/O.ABDUL JABBAR, AGED ABOUT
APHC010579812017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 987/2017
Between:
1. SHAIK BASHA, PRAKASAM DT.,, S/O.ABDUL JABBAR, AGED
ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.58-6-14, BESIDE K.RAJAIAH, NEHRU
STREET, SANTHAPET, ACHARYA RANGA BHAVAN STREET, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT,
...PETITIONER
AND
1. JONNALAGADDA THIRUPATHAIAH PRAKASAM ANR REP PP, S/O.
MALAKONDAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O.VEMAVARAM
VILLAGE, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.
2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT AT HYDERABAD.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Revision filed under Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the CriminalRevisionCase, the High Court may be pleased to file the present revision against the Judgment passed in Criminal Appeal.No.62 of 2015 dt.08- 03017 on the file of the Court of Sessions:: Prakasam Division, Markapur (Before the VI Addl. District & Sessions Judge: Markapur) Confirming the Judgment passed in C.C.No. 75 of 2012 dt.09-03-2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Podili, Prakasam District, for the following grounds among other:
IA NO: 1 OF 2017(CRLRCMP 1603 OF 2017
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 enlarge the petitioner on bail by suspending the operation of the sentence passed in CRLA.No.62 of 2015 on the file of the Court of Sessions: Prakasam Division: Markapur (Before the VI Additional District & Sessions Judge:
Markapur) dated 08-03-2017 in which, confirmed the Judgment passed in
C.C.No.75 of 2012 on the file of the court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Podili, dated 09-03-2015 pending the above Criminal Revision Case, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. MADHAVA RAO NALLURI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. N.SRIRAM MURTHY FOR R.1
2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR R.2
The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No:987 OF 2017
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:
1. Instant criminal revision case has been preferred against judgment dated 08.03.2017, passed by the VI Additional Sessions Judge, Prakasam at Markapur, in Crl.A.No.62 of 2015, whereby learned Sessions Judge has confirmed judgment, dt.09.03.2015, passed by Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Podili, in C.C. No.75 of 2012, whereby and whereunder the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five months and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Sections 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner frankly submits that the petitioner is aged more than 55 years and is suffering from several ailments, at this juncture, considering the age of the petitioner, the period of imprisonment may be reduced. He frankly submits that actually there is no issue to decide on merit.
3. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the State/ 2nd respondent placed reliance upon the consideration of this Court.
4. Having heard the fair submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and also after perusal of the observation of the trial court and the appellate court finding, I find no justification to entertain the instant revision. Learned trial court and learned appellate court have carefully scanned evidence and passed order of conviction in appropriate manner. Thereby the order of conviction is confirmed. However, considering the age and health condition of the petitioner, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced from five months to three months.
5. Accordingly, the criminal revision case is disposed of. The order suspension of sentence during the pendency of the criminal revision case stands vacated. The petitioner is directed to appear before the learned trial court within eight weeks from the date of passing of this order to serve the remaining portion of the sentence. Failing which, learned trial court shall issue non-bailable arrest warrant against petitioner to comply the order.
6. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal revision case shall stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA Dt.09.04.2026 BV