Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/186/2026 of KONDAPALLI SUBBA RAO Vs POTHINA SRINIVASA RAO on 12 March 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 186/2026 Between: 1. KONDAPALLI SUBBA RAO, S/0 CHANDRAIAH, AGED
APHC010087212026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 186/2026
Between:
1. KONDAPALLI SUBBA RAO, S/0 CHANDRAIAH, AGED 66 YEARS, EX-SARPANCH, RAJUGARIPALEM VILLAGE, MARTUR MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT-523301
...PETITIONER
AND
1. POTHINA SRINIVASA RAO, S/O TIRUPATHIRAYUDU, AGED 65
YEARS
CULTIVATION,
R/O
KARAMCHEDU
VILLAGE,
KARAMCHEDU
MANDAL,
PRAKASAM
DISTRICT-
523168.
(COMPLAINANT)
2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. V N CHAKRAPANI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
2.
The Court made the following:
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 186 of 2026 & I.A.Nos.4 & 5 of 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.
Common Order:
This Criminal Revision Case, under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C./ Sections 438 r/w 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’),, has been filed by the appellant/accused aggrieved by the Judgment dated 19.07.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.295 of 2018 by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District.
2. Vide judgment dated 05.10.2018 passed in C.C.No.167/2016 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Parchur, Prakasam District, the petitioner/accused was found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, accordingly convicted him of the said offence and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only). In default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo further SI for three (3) months. On appeal by the petitioner/accused, the appellate Court, vide the impugned judgment, confirmed the conviction recorded by the trial Court. Challenging the same, the present Criminal Revision Case is filed.
3. It is represented that both the parties have settled the dispute amicably out of the Court at the intervention of their elders and well wishers. In view of the settlement arrived between both the parties, they filed I.A.No.4 of
2026 to permit the petitioner to compromise the matter with the accused, as well as, I.A. No.5 of 2026 seeking to permit them to compound the offence and to record the compromise.
4. It is stated by 1st respondent-defacto complainant in the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.5 of 2026 that 1st respondent/complainant agreed to receive Rs.4,50,000/- towards full and final settlement and withdraw the case against the petitioner and the petitioner paid the amount through cash on 12.03.2026.
5. Today, when the case is called, complainant and son of the revision petitioner appeared before this Court and it is represented that the revision petitioner who is accused on conviction has been landed in jail and serving sentence. In the light of the compromise arrived between both the parties, the revision may be allowed. Complainant who appeared before this Court would submit that he received amount as agreed and matter may be closed. Learned counsel for the petitioner also filed receipt to that effect that they have also paid costs of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) in favour of A.P.High Court Legal Services Committee on 13.03.2026 as ordered by this Court. This Court questioned the de facto complainant with regard to compromise and he has categorically stated to that extent that he has voluntarily entered into compromise with the petitioner herein and he received the amount as agreed from the petitioner.
6. In view of the fact that parties entered into a compromise and compounded the offences, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed, setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded in the Judgment dated 19.07.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.295 of 2018 by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District, against the petitioner herein. The petitioner herein is found not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and is accordingly acquitted of the said offence.
7. Accordingly, I.A No. 4 of 2026, I.A.No.5 of 2026, and Criminal Revision Case No.186 of 2026 are allowed. The concerned Superintendent of Jail, where the petitioner is presently detained, is directed to release the revision petitioner forthwith, if he is not required in any other cases. The Secretary, A.P.High Court Legal Services Committee, is directed to utilize the deposited costs amount for purchasing necessary items for visually challenged children residing in a Government Home or any Non-Government Organization (NGO).
As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
________________________________________
Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Date: 13.03.2026 Note:- CC today (B/o) ARB
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 186/2026
Date: 13.03.2026
ARB