THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 491 OF 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 438 & 442 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘the BNSS’) seeking quashment of the order dated 29.04.2025 in Crl.M.P.No. 91 of 2025 in Crl.R.P. SR No. 3328 of 2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.

2. I have heard Mr. C.Hari Preeth, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing respondent No.1-State.

3. The case facts in brief are that the petitioner herein has filed complaint under Section 190(1)(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, vide C.C. SR No.2861 of 2024 on the file of the learned XXII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Secunderabad, alleging offences under Sections 323, 504, 506, 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, against respondent No.2/accused. However, pending proceedings, on 28.08.2024, as the petitioner could not appear for recording sworn statement, the complaint was dismissed for default. Assailing the same, the petitioner preferred revision before the learned Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, with 137 days delay. Still, on 29.04.2025 as the petitioner was called absent and process was not deposited, the petition for condonation of delay of 137 days in filing the revision was dismissed for default. Challenging the said order, the revision petitioner/complainant preferred this revision.

4. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that, due to unavoidable circumstances, the petitioner was unable to appear on the date when the impugned order was passed. Learned counsel further contends that, if an opportunity to prosecute the matter is denied, the petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and prejudice to her cause. Accordingly, it is prayed that the opportunity be extended in the interest of justice.

5. I have perused the materials on record.

6. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, and the settled legal principle that, in the course of adjudication, procedural technicalities should yield to the cause of substantive justice, and noting that the absence of the revision petitioner/complainant was neither willful nor deliberate, this Court finds it appropriate, in the interest of justice, to extend one further opportunity to the petitioner to prosecute her case.

7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 29.04.2025 is hereby set aside, and Crl.R.P. SR No. 3328 of 2025 is restored to its original file. The revision petitioner is directed to appear before the Court below within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon such appearance, the learned Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, shall consider and dispose of the petition on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law.

8. In the above terms, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

_______________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 30.07.2025 svl