##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:28452

APHC010379372009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3560]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE 21^st DAY OF JULY 2026

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1643/2009

Between:

1. C HIRUMAMILLA SUNEETHA, W/O.C.SURESH HOUSE WIFE

R/O.NEAR RAMULAVARI TEMPLE, STAMBALAGARUVVU, GUNTUR,

...PETITIONER

AND

1. C HIRUMAMILLA SURESH AND ANOTHER, S/O.BHASKAR RAO

BUSINESS R/O.VARAGANI VILLAGE, MEDIKONDUR MANDAL,

GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. T HE STATE OF A P, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH

COURT OF A.P., HYDERABAD.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Revision filed under Section 397/401 of CrPC praying that in the

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the

CriminalRevisionCase, the High Court may be pleased toto present this

Memorandum of Criminal Revision Case to this Hon'ble Court against the

Judgment in Crl.A.No.320 of 2006 dt.31-12-2007 on the file of the Court of the

III Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur against C.C.No.80/2004 dt.29-6-2006

on the file of the Court of the V Addl.Munsif Magistrate, Guntur, Guntur

District.

IA NO: 1 OF 2009(CRLRCMP 1486 OF 2009

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated

in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to

condone the delay of 190 days in presenting the Crl.R.C. of 2009 before

-2-

CRLR.C. No.1643 o20f 2260:0A9P HC:28452

this Hon'ble Court agaisnt the Judgment in Crl.A.No.320 of 2006 dt.31-12-

2007 on the file of the Court of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur.

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. MD SALEEM

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. T BALASWAMI

2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Court made the following:

-3-

CRLR.C. No.1643 o20f 2260:0A9P HC:28452

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1643/2009

ORDER:

1. The instant criminal revision case has been preferred against judgment,

dated 31.12.2007, passed in Crl.A.No.320 of 2006 on the file of learned

III Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur, whereby learned appellate court

set aside the judgment of conviction, dated 29.06.2006, passed against

the first respondent in C.C. No.83 of 2004 on the file of V Additional

Munsiff Magistrate, Guntur.

2. The petitioner, being the de facto complainant, and the wife of the first

respondent, initiated prosecution against the first respondent (A.1) and

one P.Suneetha (A.2), who is the sister of the first respondent, alleging

commission of offences punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian

Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘I.P.C.’) and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry

Prohibition Act, 1961.

3. After hearing the parties, learned Magistrate convicted A.1 for the

offences punishable under Section 498-A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4

of the Dowry Prohibition Act, while acquitting A.2 of all the charges.

4. Aggrieved by the order of conviction, A.1 preferred Crl.A.No.320 of

2006 before learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur.

5. Learned appellate court, after re-appreciating the evidence on record,

found that the allegations against A.1 and A.2 on the same set of facts

and evidence. Having found A.2 not guilty of the alleged offences and

-4-

CRLR.C. No.1643 o20f 2260:0A9P HC:28452

acquitted her, the appellate court held that there was no legal basis to

sustain the conviction of A.1 alone in the absence of independent

evidence distinguishing his role. Hence, the conviction and sentence

imposed upon A.1 was set aside. Aggrieved thereby, the de facto

complainant has filed the present criminal revision case.

6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the

material available on record.

7. It appears that the prosecution case was initiated on the basis of the

report of de facto complainant, wherein A.1 and A.2 were both arrayed

as main perpetrators of the offences under Section 498-A of IPC and

Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. It was specifically alleged

that A.1, at the instigation of A.2, subjected the petitioner to mental

cruelty and demanded dowry.

8. After thorough perusal of