Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLRC/1740/2008 of MOHD OSMAN, Vs THE STATE OF A.P., REP BY PP., on 19 November 2025
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3560] THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1740 OF 2008 Between: 1. MOHD OSMAN,, S/O. ABDULLAH AGRICULTURE, R/O.
APHC010637662008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3560]
THURSDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1740 OF 2008
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. MOHD OSMAN,, S/O. ABDULLAH AGRICULTURE, R/O. BAVAJIPALEM POST, NIZAMPATNEM MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF A P REP BY PP, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P., HYDERABAD.
2. MUVVA RAMA SESHAGIRI RAO, S/O. NAGHABHUSHANAM, BUSINESS R/O. SRIRAMNAGAR, NIDUBROLU, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. AJAY KUMAR KANAPARTHI
2. LEGAL AID Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. G JHANSI
2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
The Court made the following Order :
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defacto complainant submits that the fact as narrated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor regarding death of present Petitioner is correct.
2. Considering the entire issue, it appears that the Petitioner/ Accused found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I.Act. As the Petitioner/ Accused had already been expired, thus there is nothing left to decide the issue. Punishment for an offence and its effect thereof ends with demise of offender/ Accused himself.
3. Accordingly, the instant Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ SUBHENDU SAMANTA, J
Date: 20.11.2025
KK
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1740 OF 2008
Date: 20.11.2025
KK