##PAGE1##

2025:APHC:1070896

APHC010073272019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3521]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

I.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025

In&and

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 289/2019

Between:

B. Ravindra ...PETITIONER

AND

State of AP and others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

P Nagendra Reddy

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

Public Prosecutor (AP)

The Court made the following:

COMMON ORDER:

Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner and 2^nd respondent are present.

I.A.No.1 of 2025

3. The I.A.No.1 of 2025 is filed by 2^nd respondent/wife to compromise the

case. As the Petitioner and the 2^nd respondent have compromised the matter

2

2025:APHC:1070896

and decided to leave apart by obtaining divorce and the accused has paid

substantial amount towards settlement of the case.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the

settlement arrived at between the parties, the 2^nd respondent is permitted to

compound the offence with the Petitioner/Accused. Accordingly, I.A.No.1 of

2025 is allowed, permitting the 2^nd respondent to compound the offence with

the Petitioner/Accused.

I.A.No.2 of 2025

5. The application is filed seeking to compromise the case. A joint memo is

also filed by the Petitioner/Accused and 2^nd respondent for compromise.

6. For the reasons mentioned in the joint memo and affidavits, the petition

is allowed permitting the Petitioner to compromise the case. Accordingly, the

I.A.No.2 of 2025 is allowed.

7. In view of the above, I.A. Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 are allowed, permitting

both parties to compromise the case. Respondent No.2 is permitted to

compound the offence with the Petitioner/Accused.

8. Accordingly, the I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 are allowed, and the Criminal

Revision Case is disposed of as compromised by compounding the offence.

Consequently, the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Assistant

Sessions Judge, Nandigama, in S.C.No.388 of 2015, dated 29.03.2016, as

confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.92 of 2016, dated 08.03.2019, by the learned

XVI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nandigama, are set aside, as a

result, the Petitioner/Accused is acquitted. There shall be no order as to costs.

3

2025:APHC:1070896

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand

closed.

_________________________

Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J

Dt: 31.10.2025

KMS

4

2025:APHC:1070896

91

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 289 OF 2019

31.12.2025

W

KMS