APHC010154672026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 334/2026 Between: 1.ADITHYA GLOBAL HEALTH CARE PRIVATE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR. MARRAPU SURESH NAIDU,S/O LATE VENKATA NAIDU, AGE 45 YEARS.REGISTERED OFFICE AT DOOR NO. 18-1-33,0PP. K.G.H. O.P. GATE, MAHARANIPETA, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530 002. 2.MARRAPU SURESH NAIDU, S/O LATE VENKATA NAIDU,AGE 45 YEARS. RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 101, MAYURA BEACH APARTMENTS,DUTCH LAYOUT, NEAR VISAKHA MUSEUM, CHINA WALTAIR,VISAKHAPATNAM - 530017. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.RUDRABHATIA RAM KUMAR, S/O LATE R. VENKATA GOWRISWARA RAMASASTRY, AGE 66 YEARS, RESIDING AT DOOR NO.50-96-4/6,4 FLOOR, VISWATEJA SAI NEST, SEETHAMMADHARA NORTH EXTENSION,ABOVE INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, VISAKHAPATNAM-530013. 2.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.BANKA NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 334/2026 ORDER: The present Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioners/appellants/accused, challenging the Order dated 21.01.2026, passed by the learned XII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam, in Crl.M.P.No.2 of 2026 in Crl.A. No.505 of 2025. 2. Heard Sri Banka Nageswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor takes notice on behalf of the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners had filed Crl.M.P. No.2 of 2026 in Crl.A. No.505 of 2025 seeking suspension of the operation of the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 23.12.2025, passed by the learned IV Special Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, in C.C. No.779 of 2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He would further contend that the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, while allowing the said petition, suspended the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the trial Court till disposal of the main appeal, i.e., Crl.A. No.505 of 2025, subject to the condition of deposit of 5% of the fine amount, out of the total fine of Rs.10,00,00,000/-, before the trial Court on or before 23.03.2026, failing which the petition shall stand automatically dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, without duly considering the facts and circumstances of the case, imposed the aforesaid condition of deposit of 5% of the fine amount, and therefore, prays that the said condition be set aside. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State would submit that the Court may pass appropriate Orders. 3 5. Having considered the submissions made on either side and upon perusal of the material on record, this Court finds that the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge has duly taken into consideration the contentions of both parties while passing the impugned order. The Additional District Judge, by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Jamboo Bhandari v. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Limited and others1, has exercised its discretion judiciously. Though the said judgment contemplates imposition of a condition to deposit 20% of the fine amount, the learned Judge, taking into consideration the medical condition of the petitioner, who was undergoing treatment in the hospital, and upon perusal of the medical record placed on record, has taken a lenient view and directed the petitioners to deposit only 5% of the fine amount. 6. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality, irregularity, or perversity in the impugned order warranting interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction and the Criminal Revision Case is liable to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 24.03.2026 SAB 1 2023 INSC 822 4 170 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO:334/2026 Dt.24.03.2026 SAB