CRLRC/2230/2014 of SARANAM VENKATA POORNA CHANDER RAO, VIZIANAGARAM Vs STATE OF A.P., REP. BY P.P., HYD & 2 OTHRS on 12 March 2026

1. SARANAM VENKA S/O VENAKTESWA APARTMENTS, O VIZIANAGARAM

1. STATE OF A P REP

2. VOBBILISETTY SR ALLAKA STREET, V

3. VENKATA KRISHN SRI SARANAM VENKATESWARA R Revision filed unde circumstances stated in Case, the High Court ma by setting aside the Cri Family Court- Cum III A 07.11.2014 and pass

E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT ABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAM L REVISION CASE NO: 2230 OF 201 ATA POORNA CHANDER RAO, VIZ ARA RAO, FLAT NO. S-2, SAI AMR OPP: TOSHIAVAOLA BHAVAN, AND P BY P.P., HIGH COURT OF ANDHR RINIVASA RAO, S/O V.B. RAMANAYY VIZIANAGARAM NA PHARMACEUTICALS, REP. BY VENKATA POORNA CHANDER RAO ...RES er Section 397/401 of Cr.P.C pray the affidavit filed in support of the C ay be pleased to allow the Criminal R minal Appeal No. 20 of 2014 on th Addl. District and Sessions at Vizia DESH

H MANTA

ZIANAGARAM, RUTHA ROYAL NCS ROAD, ...PETITIONER A PRADESH. YA, R/O 6-4-13, SOLE PROP. R RAO S/O SPONDENT(S): ying that in the riminal Revision Revision petition e file of Judge, anagaram dated

IA NO: 1 OF 2014(CRLRCMP 3685 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 enlarge on bail to the petitioner/appellant pending final disposal of the Criminal Appeal 20 of 2014 on the file of Judge, Family court cum III Addl. District and Sessions at Vizayanagaram and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. Y MALATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. TADDI NAGESWARA RAO

2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following Order :

Mr. Taddi Nageswara Rao, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 submitted a Memo, dated 27.02.2026, which contains Compromise Agreement. He submits that the Respondent No.2 is bed ridden, because of the fact, it is not possible to appear before this Court personally. Compromise Agreement duly signed by the parties.

2. Mr. P. Gopala Krishna, learned counsel, representing Ms. Y. Malathi, learned counsel for the Petitioner has categorically stated that his client has paid the entire amount and Compromise Agreement was entered into.

3. Considering the entire aspect, as the matter was settled, there is nothing left in this matter to decide. However, the instant Criminal Revision has filed against the order of conviction recorded by learned Trial Court against the present Petitioner. During pendency of instant Criminal Revision, the matter was compromised and the Petitioner has paid the entire agreed sum towards full and final settlement. This fact suggests that the matter is required to be disposed of by taking note of the compounding of the offence.

4. Accordingly, the instant Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. The offence against the present Petitioner under Section 138 of N.I.Act is hereby compounded. The Petitioner is hereby acquitted from the case and sureties are also released.

5. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ SUBHENDU SAMANTA, J

Date: 13.03.2026

KK

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 2230 OF 2014

13.03.2026

KK