APHC010379442022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL Between: B.Reddeppa, M Lakshmi and Others Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. CH VENKAT RAMAN Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant petition Procedure, 1973 (in short, “Cr.P.C.”) Accused, seeking to set aside the order dated 31.12.2021 Crl.M.P.No.25 of 2021 in Crl.A.No. 42 of 2021 on the file of the Court of the X Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati . IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5713 OF 2022 ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: CH VENKAT RAMAN Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) Court made the following: The instant petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, “Cr.P.C.”), has been filed by the Petitioner/ set aside the order dated 31.12.2021 Crl.M.P.No.25 of 2021 in Crl.A.No. 42 of 2021 on the file of the Court of the X Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupati. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3396] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal has been filed by the Petitioner/ set aside the order dated 31.12.2021 passed in Crl.M.P.No.25 of 2021 in Crl.A.No. 42 of 2021 on the file of the Court of the X 2. Heard Sri Ch. Venkat Raman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order, impugned in this Criminal Petition is in contrary to the settled law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in catena of decisions; that the condition of directing the petitioner to pay the 20% of the compensation is onerous. Hence he sought for setting aside the order passed by the appellate court, confirming the condition imposed by the trial court. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the Criminal Petition. 5. It is pertinent to note that as per e-courts report, the Criminal Appeal filed by the petitioner before the first appellate court is pending since four years. Moreover, the first appellate court while suspending the execution of sentence confirmed the payment of 20% of compensation amount vide order dated 31.12.2021 in Crl.M.P.No.25 of 2021 in Crl.A.No.42 of 2021, which order is impugned in this Criminal Petition. 6. This Court is of the considered opinion that for the past four years under the guise of filing Criminal Petition before this Court against the impugned order is nothing but abuse of process of court. If at all any grievance is there, the petitioner shall agitate the same in the Appeal. Pendency of this Criminal Petition is not at all warranted. 7. In that view of the matter, this Criminal Petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed in limini. 8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 28.02.2025 KK