logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2025 APHC 1733 print Preview print Next print
Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Case No : Criminal Revision Case No. 1566 Of 2015
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
Parties : Shaik Mohammad Julfikar Ali Versus The State Of AP, through P.S. B.V.Peta (Giddalur, Prakasam District) Rep. by Public Prosecutor High Court, A.P.
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: L.N. Bhadriraju, Advocate. For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor (AP).
Date of Judgment : 27-11-2025
Head Note :-
Subject
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules / Orders Mentioned:


2. Catch Words:
- Criminal Revision
- Conviction
- Sentence
- Appeal
- Suspension of sentence
- Non‑Bailable Warrant

3. Summary:
The Court heard the criminal revision on merit and noted that the trial court’s conviction and sentence were based on detailed findings, including evidentiary values of prosecution witnesses. The appellate court had also considered the appellant’s grounds of appeal and found no illegality. The revisional court observed no justification to interfere with the lower courts’ orders. Consequently, the revision petition was dismissed as devoid of merit, and the earlier suspension of sentence was revoked. The petitioner was directed to serve the remaining sentence within three weeks, failing which a non‑bailable warrant would be issued. All pending miscellaneous applications were ordered to stand closed.

4. Conclusion:
Petition Dismissed
Judgment :-

1. The matter was heard on merit on 19.11.2025. Today, the matter is being listed under the caption “For Dismissal”.

2. It appears that against concurrent finding of an order of conviction by the learned Trial Court, the instant Criminal Revision Case has been preferred.

3. I have perused the order of sentence and conviction passed by the learned Trial Court as well as learned Appellate Court.

4. On careful observation of the findings, it appears that learned Trial Court has recorded the order of conviction and sentence against the present Petitioner by fixing several points for determination. The order of conviction has also mentioned the evidentiary value of the prosecution witnesses in detail and the documents placed by the prosecution has also been scanned.

5. On careful perusal of the observation of the learned Appellate Court, it appears that the Appellate Court has specifically decided the grounds of Appeal as mentioned by the Petitioner/ Appellant, he has also decided on the point for determination. I find no illegality and impropriety in the order itself.

6. Considering the same, I find no justification to interfere with the order of conviction passed by the learned Trial Court and confirmed by the learned Appellate Court.

7. Under the above observation, the instant Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as devoid of merit. The order of suspension of sentence passed by this Court during pendency of the instant Criminal Revision Case is hereby revoked. The Petitioner is directed to appear before the learned Trial Court within three (03) weeks from the date of passing of this order to serve out the remaining portion of sentence, failing which, learned Trial Court shall issue Non-Bailable Warrant against the present Petitioner to comply the order. Since the Petitioner is not present before this Court, let a copy of this order be served upon the learned Trial Court for ready reference.

                  As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
 
  CDJLawJournal