1 APHC010628242025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 199/2026 Between: 1. BELLAMKONDA AMALA RAJU ALIAS RAJU,, S/O. B. PHOMASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O. PLOT NO. 44, NEW BALAJI COLONY, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE CHITTOOR DISTRICT) ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, TIRUPATI WEST DIVISION, TIRUPATI, REP. THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI. 2. DEVALAMPALLI DWARAKANATHA REDDY, S/O. LATE D. RAMACHANDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O. PLOT NO. 44, NEW BALAJI COLONY, TIRUPATI. 3. M KRISHNA DASU, S/O. LATE M. CHENGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. CHAITHANYAPURAM VILLAGE, PUDIPATIA PANCHAYAT, TIRUPATI. ...RESPONDENT(S): Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the CriminalRevisionCase, the High Court may be pleased topleased to set aside the impugned Order dated 04/06/2025, in CRL.M.P. No. 292/2024 in SPL.S.C. No. 43/2021, on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati, 2 for the offences punishable u/s. 427, 506 of the I.P.C., 1860 and section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and discharge the petitioner from SPL.S.C. No. 43/2021, on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati, for the offences punishable u/s. 427, 506 of the I.P.C., 1860 IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 pleased to condone the delay of 85 days in representing the CRLRCSR. No. 15114/2025 before this Hon’ble Court IA NO: 2 OF 2026 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 pleased to condone the delay of 120 days in filing this Criminal Revision Case IA NO: 3 OF 2026 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 pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in SPL SC No. 43/2021, on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati, for the offences punishable u/s 427, 506 r/w section 34 of the IPC 1860 and section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. AKHIL KRISHNAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA I.A.No.02 of 2026 IN/AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 199/2026 COMMON ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 02. The present Criminal Revision Case is filed challenging the order dated 04.06.2025 passed in Crl.M.P. No. 292 of 2024 in Spl.S.C. No. 43 of 2021 on the file of the learned IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati, whereby the petition filed for seeking discharge of the petitioner was dismissed. 03. The petitioner was arraigned as Accused No. 2 in Spl.S.C. No. 43 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 427 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 04. Aggrieved by the said order dated 04.06.2025, the petitioner preferred the present criminal revision with a delay of 120 days. An application in I.A. No. 02 of 2026 has been filed seeking condonation of the said delay. 05. The reason assigned for the delay is that there was delay in obtaining the record from the trial Court counsel as certain documents were misplaced and time was taken for reconstruction of the record. It is contended that the delay is neither willful nor intentional. 4 06. However, no material has been placed before this Court to substantiate the said plea. There is no supporting affidavit from the counsel in the trial Court, nor any documentary proof to establish that records were misplaced or that steps were taken diligently to secure them. In the absence of any satisfactory explanation or material to demonstrate sufficient cause, this Court is not inclined to condone the inordinate delay of 120 days. 07. Even otherwise, on a perusal of the impugned order and the material available on record, this Court finds that the learned IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati, has considered the matter in accordance with law and rightly dismissed the petition. The order does not suffer from any illegality, irregularity, or perversity warranting interference in exercise of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. 08. Accordingly, I.A. No. 02 of 2026 seeking condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, the Criminal Revision Case stands rejected. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Revision Case shall stand closed. __________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 25.02.2026 KKV 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA 72 I.A.No.02 of 2026 IN/AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 199/2026 Dated 25.02.2026 KKV 6 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATI MAIN CASE NO.: CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 199/2026 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No. Date ORDER OFFICE NOTE 25.02.2026 Dr.VJP,J I.A.No.01 of 2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. Considering the submissions made and the reasons mentioned in the accompanying affidavit, this petition is allowed. The delay of 85 days is re- presenting the case is hereby condoned. I.A.No.02 of 2026 IN/AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 199/2026 The I.A.No.02 of 2026 is dismissed. Consequently, the Criminal Revision Case is rejected. (vide separate common order) ________ Dr.VJP,J KKV