APHC010531902015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3369] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1650 OF 2015 Between: 1. M.V.S.S.VARA PRASAD, S/O VENKATA RAO, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT FOOD INSPECTOR, C-43, CRP QUARTERS ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DIST. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. KOLLIBOYINA SAROJINI @ SAROJA, W/O KOTESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O D NO: 8-165/3, RAJEEV NAGAR, LAWERPET EXTENSION, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENTS Revision filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to present this memorandum of grounds of Criminal Revision Case against the Orders passed in Crl.M.P.No.4643 of 2015 in C.C.No.813 of 2013 dated 30.07.2015 on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Ongole. IA NO: 1 OF 2015(CRLRCMP 2611 OF 2015 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to 2 stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No. 813 of 2013 on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Sri M S N PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SRI K. SANDEEP, ASST. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. The Court made the following: O R D E R 1. This Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘the Cr.P.C.’) against the Orders dated 30.07.2015 passed in Crl.M.P.No.4643 of 2015 in C.C.No.813 of 2013 on the file of learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole (for short, ‘the trial Court’), wherein the petitioner/accused filed a petition under Section 45 of Indian Evidence Act seeking to send the documents i.e. Exs.P1 and P2 to a Handwriting Expert for determination of age of the ink between the writings and signatures present therein and the same was dismissed. 2. 2. Heard and perused the record. 3. A perusal of the record, it is evident that the present revision has been preferred by the petitioner/accused challenging the order dated 30.07.2015 in Crl.M.P.No.4643 of 2015 in C.C.No.813 of 2013, filed under Section 45 of Indian Evidence Act, seeking to send the documents i.e. Exs.P1 and P2 to a Handwriting Expert for determination of age of the ink between the writings and signatures present therein. 4. The case status report obtained from e-Courts shows disposal of the main C.C.No.813 of 2013 on 11.09.2015 as the cause does not survive for adjudication and the matter would become infructuous. 3 5. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as infructuous. Interim orders granted earlier, if any, shall stand vacated and the miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________ JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO Date: 22.09.2025 MS 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1650 of 2015 Date: 22.09.2025 MS