SAILAM SRINIVAS RAO v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
CRLP/2665/2025 · 2025-03-20
Harinath N
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 10532 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 10532 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010120422025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2665/2025 Between: Sailam Srinivas Rao ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. K JOSEPH Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order :
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the return of the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking to discharge his surety of Rs.3,00,000/- which was deposited vide term deposit bearing No.KK0527894, dated 31.10.2022.
3. The petitioner was directed to deposit an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- vide FDR as the petitioner had unable to produce the lorry. It is submitted that the appellate Court had allowed the appeal of the petitioners and set aside the judgement in CC.No.213 of 2016 vide judgment of the Appellate Court in Crl.A.No.265 of 2019, dated 27.05.2024.
The learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tanuku while allowing the appeal had found the petitioners not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC and Section 7 of EC Act and acquitted them and the fine amount paid by the appellants therein was also directed to be returned. The learned Judge has not observed on deposit of the surety furnished by the petitioner.
4. Aggrieved by the denial of discharging the surety, the present criminal petition is filed.
5. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the objection raised by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tanuku is hereby set aside and the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tanuku to pass appropriate orders in discharging the sureties of the petitioner, if the appeal time for appeal against the judgment of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tauku is over.
6. Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed off.
7. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N KGM
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION No.2665 of 2025 Date: 20.03.2025
KGM