1 APHC010162472024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 339/2024 Between: Bollavarapu Prasad ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G RONALD RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2. SREENIVASA RAO VELIVELA The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 339/2024 ORDER: The Instant Criminal Revision was filed against the dismissal of the Discharge Petition Order dated 19.01.2024 passed in Crl.M.P.No. 483 of 2022 in S.C.No. 578 of 2019 on the file of Special Judge for Speedy Trial of Offences under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Vijayawada. 2. Heard Sri G.Ronald Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sreenivasa Rao Velivela, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Sri Neelothpal Ganji, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the sole accused. This case is lodged against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 354-A, 506 of IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act. The petitioner has moved a petition for discharge under Section 227 of Cr.P.C., it was dismissed by the Trial Court. Having been aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred the present revision. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no sufficient material against the petitioner to proceed further in the matter. Learned Trial Judge erroneously dismissed the application. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 would submit that the prosecution after due investigation laid charge sheet against the accused, the Court has taken cognizance for the offence under Sections 354-A, 506 of IPC 3 and Section 8 of POCSO Act. There is sufficient material in the case to proceed further against the petitioner. It is not a fit case for discharge. Learned counsel would further submit that trial has commenced before the Trial Court. 5. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material placed on record, the 164 Cr.P.C statements of the victim itself shows the allegations made against the petitioner to entertain the case. The statements recorded during the course of investigation, charge sheet, FIR, in the present case suffice to proceed against the petitioner. 6. In that view, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________________ Dr. VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date:18.03.2025 UPS 4 85 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.R.C.No.339 of 2024 Dated.18.03.2025 UPS