APHC010373642020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 24905/2020 Between: Ambati Venkata Mahalakshmi, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. DASARI S V V S V PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K SATYANARAYANA MURTHY 2. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the respondents, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 2. Sri Narasimha Rao, learned counsel representing Sri S.V.V.S.V. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that respondent Nos.1 to 4 have not taken any steps for cancellation of the bail granted to the accused/respondent Nos.5 to 14 in Crime No.217 of 2018 on the file of the Malkipuram Police Station, East Godavari District. It is submitted that the 2 unofficial respondents have committed a grave offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, “the IPC”). The learned counsel further submits that, at the time of filing of the writ petition, the case was at the stage of PRC. 3. Sri Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submits that an application seeking cancellation of the bail granted to respondent Nos.5 to 14 was filed; however, the said application was returned by the jurisdictional Court. 4. Be that as it may, if respondent No.3 or respondent No.4 have not chosen to file any application seeking cancellation of bail, the petitioner, being the aggrieved person/victim/de facto complainant, has the right to file an application seeking cancellation of bail. It appears that much water has flown under the bridge by now. In view of the alternate effective and efficacious remedy available to the petitioner, the filing of the present writ petition is misconceived. 5. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent Court seeking cancellation of bail, if the case has not already ended either in acquittal or conviction. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ Dr.Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J. Date: 28.01.2026 KMS 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.24905 of 2020 Date: 28.01.2026 KMS 104