Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/1564/2015 of PERAM CHINNA REDDY, GUNTUR DT., Vs STATE OF AP., REP PP., on 27 November 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE Between: 1. PERAM CHINNA REDDY, S/O. SATYANARAYANA REDDY, R/O. 8 15, BALAJIRAOPET, TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 1. STATE OF ANDHRA
APHC010582432015
IN TH
FRIDAY,THE
TWO
THE HONOURA
CRIMINAL
Between:
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.
1. PERAM CHINNA R 15, BALAJIRAOPET
1. STATE OF ANDHR Court of AP. Counsel for the Petition
1. S B SIVA Counsel for the Respon
1. PUBLIC PROSECU The Court made the foll
None appears on listed under the caption “
2. It appears that a the learned Trial Cour preferred. E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEM THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT ABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAM L REVISION CASE NO: 1564 OF 201 REDDY, S/O. SATYANARAYANA RED T, TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. AND RA PRADESH, Rep.,by the Public Pr ...R ner: ndent: UTOR (AP) lowing Order: behalf of the Petitioner. Today, the For Dismissal”. against concurrent finding of an order rt, the instant Criminal Revision C DESH
MBER MANTA
DDY, R/O. 8-1- ...PETITIONER rosecutor, High RESPONDENT matter is being of conviction by Case has been
3. I have perused the order of sentence and conviction passed by the learned Trial Court as well as learned Appellate Court.
4. On careful observation of the findings, it appears that learned Trial Court has recorded the order of conviction and sentence against the present Petitioner by fixing several points for determination. The order of conviction has also mentioned the evidentiary value of the prosecution witnesses in detail and the documents placed by the prosecution has also been scanned.
5. On careful perusal of the observation of the learned Appellate Court, it appears that the Appellate Court has specifically decided the grounds of Appeal as mentioned by the Petitioner/ Appellant, he has also decided on the point for determination. I find no illegality and impropriety in the order itself.
6. Considering the same, I find no justification to interfere with the order of conviction passed by the learned Trial Court and confirmed by the learned Appellate Court.
7. Under the above observation, the instant Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as devoid of merit. The order of suspension of sentence passed by this Court during pendency of the instant Criminal Revision Case is hereby revoked. The Petitioner is directed to appear before the learned Trial Court within three (03) weeks from the date of passing of this order to serve out the remaining portion of sentence, failing which, learned Trial Court shall issue Non-Bailable Warrant against the present Petitioner to comply the order.
Since the Petitioner is not present before this Court, let a copy of this order be served upon the learned Trial Court for ready reference.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ SUBHENDU SAMANTA, J
Date: 28.11.2025
Note: Issue C.C by 29.11.2025 B/o KK
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1564 OF 2015
28.11.2025
Note: Issue C.C by 29.11.2025 B/o KK