SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 70964

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
Allam Nagaraju – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLRC 545/2025



THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.1 of 2025 IN/AND CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.545 of 2025

COMMON ORDER:

This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner-

complainant seeking to set aside the impugned order dated 11.08.2023 passed in CRL.M.P.No.734 of 2022 in S.R.No.3374 of 2022 in Crime No.111 of 2022 by the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hanumakonda, along with the Interlocutory Application No.1 of 2025 seeking to condone the delay of 327 days in filing the main Criminal Revision Case.

02. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondents brought to the notice of this Court that the very same petitioner had earlier filed Criminal Revision Case No.70 of 2024 before this Court, arising out of the same cause of action, and the said revision was dismissed by this Court by order dated 24.10.2024. It is further submitted that concealing the said fact, the present Criminal Revision Case has been filed, which in effect amounts to a second revision.

03. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded to the above factual position and admitted that the earlier revision was indeed dismissed by this Court.

04. It is a settled principle of law that filing of a second revision against the same cause of action is impermissible in view of the bar contained under Section 397(3) Cr.P.C. Once a revision has already been considered and dismissed by this Court, the petitioner cannot be permitted to re-agitate the very same issue by filing another revision petition under the guise of challenging the same order or proceedings.

05. In view of the above and upon recording the submissions of the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present Criminal Revision Case, as well as the Interlocutory Application filed seeking condonation of delay in its filing, are not maintainable and are liable to be dismissed.

06. Accordingly, the Interlocutory Application and Criminal Revision Case are dismissed as not maintainable.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________ JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J

Date: 04-SEP-2025

KHRM

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top