1 APHC010379322007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3605] MONDAY, THE 24th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 1469/2007 Between: 1. A.P. STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION VIZIANAGARAM BRANCH,, REP. BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, OFFICE AT VUDA BALAJI COMPLEX, VIZIANAGARAM- 535 003. ...APPELLANT AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P., AT HYDERABAD. 2. SRI TETALI VENKATA KRISHNA REDDY, S/O KAMARAJA REDDY, R/O 10-3000, CHALAPATHI NAGAR, NEAR DAIRY FARM, C/O KRISHNA MURTHY POST MASTER, ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Apellant: 1. G R SUDHAKAR Counsel for the Respodent(S): 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1469 of 2007 The Court made the following JUDGMENT: 1. The learned Standing Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the Appellant could not serve the notice on the Respondent for all these years. Recently the Appellant came to know that the Respondent had died and the Appellant also addressed a letter to withdraw the Appeal, thus, he filed the memo along with the letter seeking withdrawal of the Appeal in the circums- tances. 2. On a query by the Court on the order dated 31-07-2026 and on the Report for pendency of this matter for about 19 years even without serving notice on the Respondent, to identify the person, who is responsible for not taking steps to serve the notice for all these years. For which the learned Standing Counsel submitted that the Report is filed, during the pendency of the Appeal, many Officers are transferred from time to time and the Appellant also appointed many Standing Counsels, thus, the matter could not be pur- sued effectively for all these years for the aforesaid reasons, but there is no deliberate or willful negligence on the part of any of the Officials concerned. He further submitted that, in view of the circumstances, instructions had been received to withdraw the appeal and accordingly a memo seeking withdrawal of the appeal. 3. The learned Standing Counsel also brought to the notice of this Court that the accused/respondent had died. 3 4. In view of the death of the accused/respondent, the appeal is abated. But the fact remains that the Appellant did not pursue the old Appeal duly consulting the Standing Counsel from time to time, when this Court sought report as stated supra, they all rushed and filed the Report and a memo for withdrawal of the Appeal, these show the sorry state of affairs in the Office of the Appellant and they also contributed for pendency of this case to old case list. It is needless to mention they shall proceed against the concerned and also shall correct the process forthwith from their end to address these lapses, duly streamlining to pursue the Cases/Appeals with diligence and to give instructions from time to time to the Standing Counsels for effective disposal of the matters, failing which the concerned Officers will be held accountable as per law including recommending for departmental action. 5. The learned counsel sought liberty to institute appropriate proceedings before the competent Civil Court to recover the amount, the liberty is granted to the Appellant to institute appropriate proceedings in accordance with law, subject to law of limitation. 6. In view of the above, the Criminal Appeal is disposed of as abated. Consequently, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR Dated :24.08.2026 CHD 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1469 of 2007 Date: 24th August, 2026 CHD