Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23690 (AP)

VALLABHAPURAPU SUNIL KUMAR v. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

CRLP/6423/2021 · 2026-02-08

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010444222021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6423/2021 Between: 1.VALLABHAPURAPU SUNIL KUMAR, S/O. ANJAIAH, AGED 29 YEARS, WORKING AS POLICE CONSTABLE, KRISHNALANKA POLICE CONSTABLE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2.VALLABHAPURAPU ANJAIAH,, S/O. JHON, AGED 58 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE, YARLAGADDAVARIGUDEM, R/O. D. NO. 7-10, PRODDUTURU POST, KANKIPADU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3.PEDAPUDI SIRIVENNELA,, W/O. SRINIVASA RAO, AGED 31 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE, R/O. D. NO. 7-212, THOTLAVALLURUR ROAD, VENKATAPPAYYA BAZAAR, VUYYURU, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4.PEDAPUDI SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O. NANCHARAIAH, AGED 39 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 7-212, THOTLAVALLURUR ROAD, VENKATAPPAYYA BAZAAR, VUYYURU, KRISHNA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1.STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI. 2.VALLABAPURPAU VANI LATHA VANILATHA KODALI, W/O. SUNIL KUMAR, AGED 25 YEARS, R/O. PEDDAGUDEM, H/O. GHANTASALA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 2 1.UYYURI MANIVARUN Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: No representation for the Petitioners. Sri A.Sai Rohith, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits that in the present matter, a chargesheet has already been laid in C.C.No.786 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Movva. Considering that five years have elapsed since the filing of the chargesheet and the Petitioners have not sought amendment of the prayer, it appears that the Petitioners are either not interested in prosecuting the matter or that the parties may have arrived at a settlement before the learned Trial Court. In that view of the matter, the Criminal Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the Petitioners to challenge the chargesheet, if they are so advised, and if the same is still pending consideration before the learned Trial Court. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Dt: 09.02.2026 VTS