Telangana High Court
CRLRC/45/2026 of Adike Purushottam, Vs The State of Telangana, on 9 January 2026
HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 45 oF 2026 Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 438 and 442 of BNSS against the Order dated
132s7 |
tN THE HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 45 oF 2026
Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 438 and 442 of BNSS against the Order dated O4-11-2025 on in Crl.M.P. No. 1363 of 2025in Criminal Appeal.
No. 508 of 2025 in CC.Nl.No 7836 of 2022 on the file of the Court of the Vll Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.
Between
Adike Purushottam S/o A. Narasimha, aged about 48 years, Occ. Labor, R/o H.No. 9-1-30/1, Laxmiguda Village, GHMC Rajendernagar Circle, Ranga Reddy Dist
...REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED
AND
1. The State of Telangana, Rep. Public Prosecutor High Court at Hyderabad RESPONDENT No. 1/RESPONDENT No. 1
2. Jitender Mohite s/o Late M. Gopal Rao, aged about 44 years, Occ. Business, R/o H.No. 5-3-29211, Goshamahal, Hyderabad
..RESPONDENT No. 1/RESPONDENT No. 1/COMPLAINANT
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri MD. Mukhtar Pasha Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: Sri M' Ramachandra Reddy, Additional Public Prosecutor Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: No Representation The Court made the following: ORDER
t:
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
.THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.45 ot 2026
O9TH JANUARY,2026
Betweerr:
Adike Purushottam
Petitioner
AND
The State of Telangana
Rep. thrcugh Public Prosecutor and 1 other Respondents
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:
Th s criminal revision case is filed seeking to set aside the order dated 04.11.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.l 363 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.SO8 of 2Q25 in CC.Nl.No.7836 ot 2022 on the fite of the learned Vll Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad and to permit him to contest the appeal without any deposit in the interest of justice.
2. He;ard MD.Mukhtar Pasha, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri.M.Rarnachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respr>ndent-State. There is no representation on behalf or respondent No.2. Perused the record.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was found guilty under seotion 138 of the Nl Act and accordingly convicting him trial \ i
,s,, Crl.R.C.No.45 of 2026 court sentenced the accused to pay a fine of Rs.12,00,0001 and in default accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period for 3 months. out of Rs.12,00,000/-, Rs.10,000/- shall be defrayed to the state and remaining Rs.1 1 ,90,000/- shall be paid to the complainant. Accused shall pay the entire fine amount in three instalments within 3 months from the date of this judgment. The petitioner filed a petition under section 3Bg(1) cr.p.c., praying for suspension of sentence imposed by the trial Court in CC.Nl.No.7g36 of 2022 (old c.c.Nl.No.523 of 2018) on the fite of tearned xil Judicial Magistrate of First class, Hyderabad dated 12.09.202s, wherein the sessions Court suspended the sentence on condition that the petitioner shall deposit 2oo/o out of the compensation amount within sixty days from the date of this order.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the sessions court, granting suspension on the same terms and conditions imposed by the trial court subject to revision petitioner depositing 20o/o out of the compensation amount within sixty days. He submits that the revision petitioner is in dire financial problems and was unable to arrange the required huge amount of 2oyo of the compensation amount i.e. Rs.2,40,000/- even after putting his best and sincere efforts. Hence, prays to set aside the condition in the order passed by the trial court and to allow the revision case. / / i1
I
IS, ' Crl.R.C.No.45 of 2O26
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the same and prays to dismiss the revision case
6. on glerusal of record and in view of the submissions made by the learnerl counsel for the petitioner, this Court is inclined to modify the condition imposed by the tlial court and the petitioner shall deposit 596 of the compensation amount instead of 2oo/o of the compensa':ion amount before the trial Court. Except for the said modification, the other conditions imposed by the trial court vide order 04.11.2025 shall remain unaltered.
7. with the above observation, the criminar revision case is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/- V.KAVITHA DEPUTY REGISTRAR N OFFICER To,
1. The Vll l\dditional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad
2. The Xll Judicial.t\rlagistrate of First Class, t\/anoranjan Complex, Exhibition Ground, Nampally, Hyderabad 3' Two CCr; Iq -thq Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabird [OUf]
4. One CC io Sri Md. Mukhtar pasha Advocate tOpUCI fh 5. Two CD,3opies "w VH/PSL iii
I a HIGH CCIURT DATED: 09/0112026
ORDER
CRLRC.lrlo.4S ot 2026 DISPOSING OF THE CRL.R.C tt Ta t (l Z.
oI 0 6 l\|Af i0?6 n r\ i *
1) 1/ i l i I ; !
II a i I
i I I aI I II I I I i II t I IIt I : II Iit !i : I t I *i I I I I I i I ( .IJ.! r-..1