Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/1566/2015 of SHAIK MOHAMMAD JULFIKAR ALI Vs THE STATE OF A.P., on 26 November 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA CRIMINAL REVISION Between: 1. SHAIK MOHAMMAD JULFIKAR ALI, S/O. SHAIK HABEEB, AGED 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION PRIVATE DRIVER, R/O H.NO:6 BHOIGUDA, BACKSIDE
APHC010150022015
IN TH
THURSDAY,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. SHAIK MOHAMMA YEARS, OCCUPAT BHOIGUDA, BA SECUNDERABAD
1. THE STATE OF A District) Rep. by Pub Counsel for the Petition
1. L N BHADRIRAJU Counsel for the Respon
1. PUBLIC PROSECU The Court made the foll
The matter was h being listed under the cap E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) E TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF NOV THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT ABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAM L REVISION CASE NO: 1566 OF 201 AD JULFIKAR ALI, S/O. SHAIK HABE TION PRIVATE DRIVER, R/O H.NO:6 ACKSIDE OF OLD GANDHI
AND A P, through P.S. B.V.Peta (Gidda blic Prosecutor High Court, A.P. ...R ner: ndent: UTOR (AP) lowing Order : heard on merit on 19.11.2025. Today ption “For Dismissal”. DESH
EMBER MANTA
EEB, AGED 34 -5-475 A, NEW HOSPITAL, ...PETITIONER alur, Prakasam RESPONDENT y, the matter is
2. It appears that against concurrent finding of an order of conviction by the learned Trial Court, the instant Criminal Revision Case has been preferred.
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: 27.11.2025
Note: Issue C.C by 28.11.2025 B/o KK
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1566 OF 2015
Date: 27.11.2025
Note: Issue C.C by 28.11.2025 B/o KK