Telangana High Court
CRLRC/35/2026 of Shri. Udhari Gopal @ Dhanraj Vs The State of Telangana on 9 January 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 35 OF 2026 Revision Case under Sections 438 & 442 of BNSS against the order dated 30-12-2025 passed
[ 3257 I
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 35 OF 2026
Revision Case under Sections 438 & 442 of BNSS against the order dated 30-12-2025 passed in crl.M.P.No.1725 of 2o2s in crt.Ap.No.637 of 2o2s on the file of the court of the Additional sessions Judge for the Trial of communal offence Cases-cum-Vll Additional Sessions Judge-cum-XXl Additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad in CC.N1.No.95792022 on the file of the Court of the V Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hyderabad.
Between:
Shri. Udhari Gopal @ Dhanraj, Age: 50 years, Occ: GHMC Employees Union Office Regd. No. B 2800, GHMC Head Office, Lower Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.
R/o. H. No.3-10-10, Gunti Jangaiah Nagar Colony, LB Nagar, Hyderabad.
... Petitioner/AppellanUAccused
AND
The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor Hon'ble High Court for theStateofTelanganaatHyderabad. ...RespondenURespondent Smt. Bhupathi Prameela, Wo. B. Krishna, Age: 5g years, Occ: GHMC
Employee, Rl o. 1 -3445125/FF, Kavadiguda, Muggubasthi, Hyderabad.
...Respondent/Complai nant
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. S. Viplav Simha Reddy Counsel for the Respondent No.1: None Appeared Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Sri M. Ramachandra Reddy, Additional Public Prosecutor
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TEL,6 NGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADI SR IIEVI
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.35 of 20:r= i
O9TH JANUARY,2026
Between:
Udhari Gopal @ Dhanraj
I etitioner
AND
The State of Telangana
Rep. through Public Prosecutor and 1 other.
li -'spondents
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.
ORDER:
This criminal revision case is filed seeking to s order dated 30.12.2025 passed in Crl.lt4.p.No.172{i Crl.A.No.637 of 2025 in C.C.Nt.No.9S79 of 2022 on I learned Additional Sessions Judge for the trial of Comrr cases-cum-Vll Additional Sessions Judge-c0m-XXl Acr Judge, Hyderabad at Nampally and to direct the .r suspend the sentence imposed by the trial Court in C.l of 2022 (Old CC.Nl.No.95 of 2020) dated 28.'t 1.2O25 or Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hyderabad without i condition that the petitioner/appellhnVaccused has to dr: the compensation amount and pass such other order ; deems fit and proper. -.t aside the of 2025 in e file of the rnal offence itional Chief al Court to .N1.No.9579 the file of V nposing the rosit 20% of s the Court \
IS,l Crl.R.C.No.35 of20Z6
2. Heard lt/r.S.Viplav Simha Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri.ftl.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. There is no representation on behalf or respondent No.2. Perused the record.
Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was found guilty under section 138 of the Nl Act and accordingly convicting him trial Court'sentenced the accused to undergo- sinlpte-imprisonrnent'for.a period of six months and further directed to pay compensation of Rs.8,00,0001 within 30 days from the date of Judgment' The petitioner filed a petition under section 389(1) Cr.P'C., praying for suspension of sentence imposed hy the trial Court in CC.NI'No 9579 of2022dated28.'ll.2O25onthefileofVJudicialMagistrateofFirst Class, Hyderabad, wherein the trial Court suspended the sentence on condition that the petitioner shall deposlt 20% of ' the compensation amount by way of FDR before the trial Court on or be'fore 28.02.2026, failing which the suspension of sentence shall stand vacated automatically without further reference to the Court'
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court, erred in calculating the deposit on the enhanced compensation of Rs.8,00,0001, though the cheque amount involved is only Rs.5,00,000/-. The enhancement of compensation by the trial Court
IS, I Cr. .C.No.35 of 2026 is itself under challenge in appeal and cannot be [e basis for imposing a heavy pre-deposit condition. lt is further sr- cmitted that the direction to deposit Rs.1,60,0001 places an : rerous and disproportionate burden on the petitioner, by frustrating he statutory right of appeal. He submits that the Hon'ble Suprenr, , Court has categorically held that conditions imposed while suspending sentence should not render the appeal illusory or iraccessible. Because, the learned Sessions Court failed to consider. he financial capacity of the petitioner and the important fact tha the cheque I\ amount is only Rs.5,00,000/-. Hence, prays to sr.' aside the condition in the order passed by the trial Court and o allow the revtston case.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed tr I same and prays to dismiss the revision case.
6. On perusal of record and in view of the submissic rs made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is inclirt rd to modify the condition imposed by the trial court and the pe,l tioner shall deposit 10o/o of the compensation amount instead ol 20% of the compensation amount before the trial Court. Except cr the said modification, the other conditions imposed by the triar Court vide order 30.12.2025 shall remain unaltered. ( ( /
trl-\qa \1 '\-?. \
"$ Is, t Crl.R.C.No.35 of2026
disposed of With the above observation, the criminal revision case is Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/. MOHD ISMAIL DEPUW REGISTRAR To, ,, tt //TRUE COPY// i'. "'---- \, secrtoru oFFrcER The Additionar sessions Judge for the Triar of communar offence cases- cum-Vil Additionar sessioni Judge-cum-XXI nJoitionat cr,i"i J"Jg", Hyderabad. The V Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hyderabad. The S^tation House Officer, Saifabad polic; Statio;, Hyderabad. Two CCs to the public prosecutor, High Court toi tne State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] I 9n" !! !o tMr S. Viptav Simha Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]
6. Two CD Copies
J
Kam/BA { l
HIGH COURT DATED:0910112026
ORDER
CRLRC.No.35 of 2026 DISPOISNG OF THE CRIMINAL REVISION CASE oRll {, ;r! lUllr ..1r:.'--'rEq* t ou, 3i (\:te ;1(i ':.'9-.'t\+'-\ iF= - , t .ar: a tr*t