Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna

III Additional District Judge, Rajampet

III Add Dist Court Complex Rajampet · Kadapa · Andhra Pradesh

Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna, III Additional District Judge, Rajampet, is posted at III Add Dist Court Complex Rajampet, Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh, India. 1,820 court orders on record since 2020. 5 judgments with full text available. Primarily handles CRLMP, EP, AS cases.

1,820

Total Orders

Judgments

Orders/Month

Posting

Featured Judgments

CRLRP/12/2023

A.Gayathri(C.C No.111/2021 of JFCM Railway kodur) vs S.H.O Rly kodur P.S

18 Apr 2023

P a g e | 1

In the Court of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Rajampet

Present: Sri R.V.V.S. Murali Krishna III Additional Sessions Judge, Rajampet.

Tuesday this the 18th day of April, 2023.

Criminal Revision Petition No.12 of 2023

Agumudi Gayathri, W/o Lingeswar Yadav, aged 33 years, Hindu,

Software Employee, R/at Ram Nagar, Rly. Kodur town and mandal, Annamaiah district.

.. Revision Petitioner / Defacto complainant

Versus

1. Burru Venkata Ramana @ Burru Venkata Ramanaiah, aged 46 years, R/at D.No.8/35, Ram Nagar, Rly. Kodur Town and mandal,

Annamaiah district.

…. Respondent/Accused No.4

State: S.H.O., Rajampet Rly. Kodur Police Station.

.. Complainant/ Respondent

Order in Criminal Revision Petition No.12 of 2023

From which court the : Judicial Magistrate of First Class Revision is preferredCourt, Rly. Kodur

Number of the case in : Crl.M.P.No. 439 of 2022 the Court

Number of the Revision: Crl.R.No.12 of 2023 Petition

Name and Description : Agumudi Gayathri, W/o Lingeswar of the Revision Yadav, aged 33 years, Hindu, PetitionerSoftware Employee, R/at Ram Nagar, Rly. Kodur town and mandal, Annamaiah district.

The Sentence and Law : Petition filed u/sec.397 of CrPC under which it was against the orders in Crl.M.P.439 of imposed2012 u/sec.239 of CrPC. Whether confirmed, : In the result, the criminal revision modified or reversed, ifpetition is hereby allowed. modified, the modification

P a g e | 2

Date of presentation: 04.02.2023

Date of Last : 16.02.2023 representation Date of admission: 17.02.2023

Date of hearing: 12.04.2023

Date of order: 18.04.2023

This criminal revision petition coming on 12.04.2023 for hearing before me in the presence of Sri.D.Narasimhulu and

Sri.Nageswar V.Chowdary, Advocates for revision petitioner/ defacto complainant and the Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent / complainant and after perusing the records on file and hearing on both sides, this court delivered the following:

O R D E R

This criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 of

Cr.P.C., by the revision petitioner /defacto complainant against the orders passed by the trial court in Crl.M.P.No.439 of 2022 in

C.C.111/2021 on the file of Judl. Magistrate of I Class, Rly. Kodur.

2.The petitioner filed complaint before the SHO, Rly. Kodur against the R1 and 3 others alleging that they harassed the petitioner by demanding additional dowry. Accordingly the police registered the complaint as case in Cr.No.59/2021 and investigated into and filed the charge sheet. The trial court took the cognizance for the offences u/sec.498-A of IPC, and sec.3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and registered the charge sheet as CC

No. 111/2021 and posted for framing of charges. At the stage the first respondent filed the Crl.M.P.439/2022 to discharge the R1.

The trial court allowed the application erroneously. Aggrieved

P a g e | 3 with the orders the petitioner filed the present revision petition on the following grounds that the trial court not exercised the judicial discretion properly. The trial court failed to give notice to the revision petitioner. The impugned order is against the principles of natural justice. The trial court erroneously discharged the R1. The trial court ought to consider the material placed by the prosecution in a right prospective manner. The role of R1 was clearly established through the records submitted by the prosecution. The orders passed by the trial court are premature and prays to set aside the order.

3.Notice given to the respondents.

4. Both parties not adduced any oral or documentary evidence.

5. Heard the petitioner and R3. R2 filed written arguments.

6. The first respondent contending that the trial court rightly appreciated the material on record and discharged the R1. The prosecution not placed any material against the R1 to charge sheeted. The R1 is residing elsewhere. He is noway concerned with the matrimonial life of petitioner. Except the distant relationship with the petitioner’s husband, he is noway concerned with the matrimonial life of the petitioner and he is neither involved directly or indirectly and supported the order of the Trial court and relied upon the decision in

Preethi Guptha & another

Vs.

State of Jarkhand and another

P a g e | 4

in Crl.A.No.1512 of 2010 arised out of SLP (Criminal 4684

of 2009). Wherein his lordship observed the courts have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with the complaints in matrimonial cases u/sec.498-A of IPC and must take pragmatic realities into consideration. The allegations of harassment of husband’s close relations who had been residing entirely in different cities and rarely visited the complainant house. The allegations of the complaint are required to be scrutinized with great care and circumspection.

7.The R2 contending that the trial court erred in allowing the

Crl.M.P.439/2022. Whether the petitioner committed the offence

or not is point for consideration at the stage of trial. There are specific overt acts against the R1, the present petition is required to be allow.

8.Now the points for consideration:

(1) Whether the impugned order passed by the trial court is suffers from illegality? (2) Whether the order passed by the trial court warrants any interference by way of this revision or not?

9. Point No.1:

(1) Whether the impugned order passed by the trial court is suffers from illegality? The petitioner filed complaint before the SHO, Rly. Kodur against the R1 and 3 others alleging that they harassed the petitioner by demanding additional dowry. Accordingly the police registered the complaint as case in Cr.No.59/2021 and

P a g e | 5 investigated into and filed the charge sheet. The trial court took the cognizance for the offences u/sec.498-A of IPC, and sec.3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and registered the charge sheet as CC

No. 111/2021 and posted for framing of charges. At the stage the first respondent filed the Crl.M.P.439/2022 to discharge the R1.

The trial court allowed the application erroneously. Aggrieved with the orders the petitioner filed the present revision petition on the following grounds that the trial court not exercised the judicial discretion properly. The trial court failed to give notice to the revision petitioner. The impugned order is against the principles of natural justice. The trial court erroneously discharged the R1. The trial ought to consider the material placed by the prosecution in a right prospective manner. The role of R1 was clearly established through the records submitted by the prosecution. The orders passed by the trial court are premature and prays to set aside the order.

10.Where as the respondent contending that the trial court rightly appreciated the material on record and discharged the R1.

The prosecution not placed any material against the petitioner to charge sheeted. The revision petitioner is residing elsewhere. He is noway concerned with the matrimonial life of petitioner. Except the distant relationship with the petitioner’s husband, he is noway concerned with the matrimonial life of the petitioner and he is neither involved directly or indirectly.

11. R2 also supported the petitioner’s contest.

P a g e | 6

12.As could be seen from the averments in Crl.M.P.439/2022 the R1 contending the only allegation against the petitioner is mentioned in the last para of the charge sheet that the mother- in-law, sister-in-law and this petitioner stated that they won’t give single Rupee, certificates and gold to her unless she signed in divorce papers, otherwise they will see her end. There is no specific allegation or word against the R1 herein to continuing the case against the R1 herein is abuse of process.

13.The R2 herein contended that there is sufficient material to frame the charges and opposed the application.

14. On hearing the petitioner the trial court allowed the same through its impugned orders dated 17.11.2022 which is challenged by the petitioner under this revision petition.

15.As could be seen from the impugned order the reasons recorded by the trial court for the discharge of the R1 are that there are no specific allegation against the petitioner in entire case record as far as section 498-A of IPC is concerned. The contents of Dava and 161 (3) CrPC statement there are no specific allegation against the petitioner about the demand of dowry and harassment of dowry against the revision petitioner.

Accordingly the R1 is discharged.

16.As could be seen from the first information report as well as the 161 CrPC statements of Lws.1 to 4, it reveals when the R1 necked out the revision petitioner herein, she take shelter at the house of her sister and make efforts through elders for reunion.

By that time the R1 along with other accused came to her and

P a g e | 7 stated they won’t give single Rupee and certificates and threatened her and also insisted her to sign on the divorce papers, otherwise they will see the end of revision petitioner’s children. Whether the particular allegations are suffice to attract ingredients under section 498-A of IPC and sec. 3 & 4 of Dowry and Prohibition Act or whether it attracts any other offence can be decided by the trial court at the time of framing of charges.

17.Section 239 CrPC prescribes procedure when the accused shall be discharged. The trial court can discharge the accused only when it considers the charge against the accused to be groundless. If the trial court decides to frame charge it need not pass any order specifying the reasons why it opts to do so.

18.Section 240 of CrPC prescribes the procedure for framing of charges. If upon such consideration, examination, if any and hearing, the Magistrate is of opinion that there is a ground for resuming that the accused has committed an offence triable under this chapter, which such Magistrate is competent to try and which in his opinion, could be adequately punished by him, he shall frame in writing a charge against the accused.

19.The germine for consideration whether there is any ground to frame charge or not the trial court has to consider the allegations in the charge sheet and the annexures enclosed to it.

20.The case facts in the Judgments Preethi Guptha & another Vs. State of Jarkhand and another are not identical to the present case facts and circumstances.

P a g e | 8

21.It was held in “K. Raghuram Reddy and another v.

State of Telangana and another, reported in 2019(1)

A.L.D., (Crl.) 114, his Lordships observed that:

“According to section 239 Cr.P.C, if the court is of the opinion upon considering the police report and documents sent with it under section 173 and making such examination, if any, of the accused as the Magistrate or Sessions Judge thinks necessary and after giving the prosecution and the accused an opportunity of being heard, the

Magistrate or Sessions Judge considers the charge

against the accused to be groundless ness, he shall discharge the accused and record his reasons for so doing. The word “ groundless” would mean the absence of reasonable ground to expect a conviction. “ Groundless” is equivalent to saying that there is no ground for framing the charges, which depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. Therefore, only when the Magistrate or Sessions Judge comes to conclusion that there are no grounds to frame a charge for specific offence, the court can discharge the accused for such offence. Even the scope of sections 238 and 239 Cr.P.C is limited, such power has to be exercised only when the

Magistrate or Sessions Judge came to conclusion

that it is groundless, based on charge-sheet and documents filed under section 173 of Cr.P.C.”.

22.His Lordships further observed that:

“Consideration of records and documents at the stage of framing charges is for the limited purpose of ascertaining whether or not there is sufficient ground to proceed against the accused. Whether

P a g e | 9 the material at the hands of the prosecution is sufficient and whether the trial will end in conviction or acquittal are not relevant consideration at the stage of framing of charge.”

23.In the present case the allegations in the first information report and the 161 CrPC statements of Lws.1 to 4 clearly shows that the R1 along with other accused approached the revision petitioner and insisted her to sign on the divorce papers, otherwise they will see the end of the revision petitioner / her sister’s children. Therefore the trial court ought to frame appropriate charges. Whether the prosecution will able to prove those facts or not are not the subject matter at the stage of framing of charges.

24. As could be seen from the order of the trial court, it seems the trial court not considered the material on record and discharged the accused by observing there is no ground to proceed against the R1. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. The trial court shall hear the accused and consider the material on record and pass appropriate orders under section 240 of CrPC.

This point is answered accordingly.

Point No.2:

(2) Whether the order passed by the trial court warrants any interference by way of this revision or not?

25.In view of the findings on point No.1, the order passed by the trial court is suffers with infirmities and it is liable to be set aside.

26.This point is answered accordingly.

P a g e | 10

27.In the result, the criminal revision petition is hereby

Allowed.

Dictated to the Personal Assistant, typed by him, corrected and

pronounced by me in the open court this the 18th day of April, 2023.

Sd/-R.V.V.S. Murali Krishna

III Additional Sessions Judge, Rajampet.

EP/22/2021 Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution Disposal Date: 20-04-2023

M/s Shriram City Union fin rep A.VenaKataiah GPA AC89/2015 vs K.Maraiah

20 Apr 2023

CRLMP.BAIL/15/2023 Allowed

shAIK Misba(a1 a4 a5 a6) cr .no 26/2023 vs SH.O Kodur P.S

20 Apr 2023

CRLMP.BAIL/14/2023 Dismissed Disposal Date: 20-04-2023 Iii Additional District

Shaik Sabdar basha @chand basha (cr.no.26/2023 vs SH.O Kodur P.S

20 Apr 2023

CRLMP.BAIL/13/2023 Dismissed Disposal Date: 24-04-2023 Iii Additional District

Budhuru Prasad(S.C.no.4/2022) vs SHO Chitvel P.S

24 Apr 2023

Order Record 1,785 total

Case No.	Parties	Date	Type	Outcome
CRLMP.BAIL/13/2023	Budhuru Prasad(S.C.no.4/2022) vs SHO Chitvel P.S	24 Apr 2023	Order	Dismissed Disposal Date: 24-04-2023 Iii Additional District
EP/22/2021	M/s Shriram City Union fin rep A.VenaKataiah GPA AC89/2015 vs K.Maraiah	20 Apr 2023	Order	Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution Disposal Date: 20-04-2023
CRLMP.BAIL/14/2023	Shaik Sabdar basha @chand basha (cr.no.26/2023 vs SH.O Kodur P.S	20 Apr 2023	Order	Dismissed Disposal Date: 20-04-2023 Iii Additional District
CRLMP.BAIL/15/2023	shAIK Misba(a1 a4 a5 a6) cr .no 26/2023 vs SH.O Kodur P.S	20 Apr 2023	Order	Allowed
CRLRP/12/2023	A.Gayathri(C.C No.111/2021 of JFCM Railway kodur) vs S.H.O Rly kodur P.S	18 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
AS/19/2022	Pamuleti Nageswaraiah vs Shaik Yusuf	17 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/12/2023	C.Sivaram @ koti (cr.no.46/2023) rajampet P.S vs S.H.O RAjampet (u) P.S	15 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/2/2022	Thunga Subramanyam vs The Branch Manager, Canara Bank, Railway Kodur Branch, Kadapa District.	13 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CRLA/6/2023	State Represented by S.H.O.Pengalur P.S vs E.Rama chandra and onother C.C.no.121/2016	12 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/11/2023	Avulakunta Lakshmikar(Cr.no.09/2023) vs S.H.O SEB Kodur P.S	11 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/16/2022	M/s Shriram City Union Fin Ltd rep by its GPA A. Venkataiah vs R1) P. Sunil Kumar Reddy (EP against R1 and R2 )	10 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/74/2021	M/s Shriram city Union Fin Ltd rep by its GPA A. Venkataiah vs Panthagaani Muni Prasad (R1) EP against R1 only	10 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/76/2021	M/s Shriram City union Fin. Ltd rep by its A.Venkataiah vs K.Suvarna Rao (R1) and another EP against R1 and R2	10 Apr 2023	Order	—
CRLA/17/2023	B.Israel@Sanjay (C.C.no.49/2020 JFCM Rjpt vs S.H.O.Rajampet U/G P.S	06 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/10/2023	B.Prasad(S.C.no.4/2022) vs S.H.O Chitvel P.S	06 Apr 2023	Order	—
OS/28/2018	P.Sreedhar Reddy and another vs Palem Prabhakar	03 Apr 2023	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/9/2023	Chevvu Ashok Kumar Reddy vs Station house officer mannur p.s	03 Apr 2023	Order	—
EP/48/2018	Daruvuru @ Daruvu Narisimhulu @ Narasimhulu Rep by his GPA Holder Tarigopula Changalrayudu vs Kovuri Sivaraja Naidu	31 Mar 2023	Order	—
SC/5/2022	SHO Pulllampet P.S vs Yatagiri Jaya Ram (A1) and another	31 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
CMA/9/2022	Kalluru Venkateswara Prasad vs D.Dasaradha Varma	29 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
G.W.O.P/4/2020	Shaik Mahammad Fazil Elahi vs Patan Sameera	29 Mar 2023	Order	—
AS/12/2022	Sangaraju Venkataramaraju having died his L.Rs 1. Sangaraju Reddamma and another vs Devalaraju Nagaraju	27 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
EP/5/2022	M/s Shriram City Union Fin Ltd., Rep by its GPA A. Venkataiah vs P. Subbarayudu (R2) and another	27 Mar 2023	Order	—
AS/2/2023	Kambayigari Subba Narasimhulu vs Arigela Nagaraju and another	24 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
MVOP/5/2021	P.Venkata Subbaiah vs K.R.Ramalinga Varma	24 Mar 2023	Order	—
MVOP/8/2022	Nutheti Narayanamma vs Kuncham Venkata Krishna Reddy	24 Mar 2023	Order	—
MVOP/24/2022	Kesarapu Anitha vs Gujjala Sanjeevarayudu	23 Mar 2023	Order	—
MVOP/6/2021	Nagineni Amaravathi vs Gunja Ramu	21 Mar 2023	Order	—
EP/85/2021	M/S Shriram City Union Fin. Ltd rep by its A. Venkataiah vs D. Obaiah (EP Against R1) only	20 Mar 2023	Order	—
SC/41/2020	The Inspector of Police, Rajampet vs Meda srihari rao	20 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/8/2023	Shaik Misba (A1) cr.no.2/2023 JFCM Nandalur vs S.H.O Rly kodur	18 Mar 2023	Order	—
CMA/6/2022	Yerrabapu Sanjeeva Reddy vs Yerrabapu Sailaja	17 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
SC/42/2020	The Inspector of Police, Rajampet vs Kama Lakshmipathi reddy	17 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
CRLA/51/2022	G.Sivarama Raju vs Varadaraju Krishna veni	16 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
EP/21/2021	M/s Shriram City Union Fin rep A.Venkataiah GPA AC908/2013 vs D.Obaiah	14 Mar 2023	Order	—
CRLRP/47/2022	Vs	14 Mar 2023	Order	—
CRLMP.BAIL/7/2023	YamalaSudhakar vs S.H.O Rajampet(u)P.S	14 Mar 2023	Order	—
EP/7/2022	M/s Shriram City Union City Union Fin Ltd., rep by its GPA A. Venkatiah vs R1) Sirivaram Narasaiah and another	13 Mar 2023	Order	—
EP/28/2022	M/s.Shriram City Union Finance Ltd., Rajampet, rep. by its GPA holder vs Mahammed Talari Shaik	13 Mar 2023	Order	—
EP/81/2021	M/s Shriram City Union Fin. Ltd rep by its A. Venkataiah vs Dindu Subramanyam (R1) EP against R1 only	09 Mar 2023	Order	—
CRLA/74/2022	V.Hari Prasad and 3 others vs B.Jayaramaiah	09 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
CMA/8/2022	Nuka Ramachandra Reddy vs Pallam Raja	06 Mar 2023	Order	—
OS/24/2016	M.S.Sharfuddin vs G.Dhanajee @ Dhana	06 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
OS/25/2016	M.S.Sharfuddin vs Smt.G.Rukminibhai	06 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
EP/6/2022	M/s Shriram City Union fin Ltd rep by its GPA A. Venkataiah vs R1.) K. Penchalaiah	03 Mar 2023	Order	—
CMA/7/2022	Thimmiri Prasad vs Bommisetty Sampurnamma	02 Mar 2023	Judgement	—
EP/10/2022	M/s Shriram City Union Fin LTd rep by its A. Venkataiah vs R2) A,. Venkata Konda Reddy EP against R2 only	02 Mar 2023	Decree	—
EP/20/2022	M/s Shriram City Union fin Ltd rep by its A. Venkataiah vs S.Lakshmi Devi (R3) EP against R3 only	02 Mar 2023	Order	—
MVOP/1/2022	Arava Manohar Reddy vs Patan Najeer @ Nazeer	02 Mar 2023	Order	—
EP/34/2019	Gudaru Nagaiah Naidu S/o Papaiah Naidu vs Nookala Madhavi	01 Mar 2023	Order	—
CRLMP.BAIL/6/2023	Shaik Misba(A1 TO A6) Cr.no 26/2023 vs S.H.O Rly kODUR P.S	01 Mar 2023	Order	—
CMA/2/2022	P. Hemavathi vs Dasari Sivaram Goud	28 Feb 2023	Order	—
EP/8/2022	M/s Shriram City Union Fin Ltd rep by its GPA A. Venkataiah vs T. Chandra Sekhar (R3) EP against R3 only	28 Feb 2023	Order	—
EP/98/2019	Yadalla Venkata Sasidhar Prasad vs Therla Mallikarjuna Rao	28 Feb 2023	Order	—
AS/10/2019	Yadavalli Durgamma (Since Dised), Yadavalli Dhanunjayavarma and 5 others vs Chittee Jayamma	27 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/5/2023	K.Reddaiah Gowd (A9)(SC.NO.73/2021) vs SHO Rajampet P.S	22 Feb 2023	Order	—
AS/7/2022	Thallapaka Indiramma vs G. Kanakadevi	17 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
AS/10/2022	Gadi Ramana REddy vs Gadi Subba Reddy	17 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
CRLA/30/2022	Naga Ramasubba Reddy vs Vs	17 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
EP/76/2021	M/s Shriram City union Fin. Ltd rep by its A.Venkataiah vs K.Suvarna Rao (R1) and another EP against R1 and R2	14 Feb 2023	Order	—
CRLMP.BAIL/3/2023	Mekala Sidhu@Meka Siddaiah(A2,3,6,7) CR.NO.2/2023 vs S.H.O RLY-KODUR	14 Feb 2023	Order	—
CRLMP.BAIL/4/2023	C.Eswaraiah@Gundu Chinna (A1 and A5) vs S.H.O RLY-KODUR	14 Feb 2023	Order	—
MVOP/21/2022	Balaraju VenkataSubbamma vs P.Pushpalatha	13 Feb 2023	Order	—
SC/57/2021	Nalleballe Sambasiva @ Samba sivudu @ Sambha vs The Inspector of Police, Rajampet	13 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
EP/48/2019	M/s Shriram City Union Finance Limited vs M.Venkateswarlu	11 Feb 2023	Order	—
MVOP/16/2022	Bharatala Sivaiah vs Mallela Nagendra Babu	11 Feb 2023	Order	—
MVOP/18/2022	Bandila Veerendra vs Somula Siva Kumar Reddy	11 Feb 2023	Order	—
MVOP/24/2019	Meegada Chandra Sekhar reddy amd 2 others vs Balaji Logistics companty Rep.by its MD	11 Feb 2023	Order	—
OS/5/2020	Yandra Chandra Sekhar Reddy vs Gobburu Jagadeesh Kumar and 3 others	11 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
EP/27/2022	M/s.Shriram City Union Finance Ltd., vs Vertex Minerals rep. by its Managing Partner K.Sridevi	08 Feb 2023	Order	—
EP/1/2023	M/s.Shriram City Union Finance Ltd.,rep. by its GPA holder vs Praveen Kumar Mandala	07 Feb 2023	Order	—
EP/35/2020	Musalliahagari Gangi Reddy vs C.Narapa Reddy L.Rs 1) Chappidi Narayana Reddy	07 Feb 2023	Order	—
CRLA/159/2006	Eerasani Rajendra vs The SHO, Mannur PS	07 Feb 2023	Order	—
CRLMP.BAIL/2/2023	Shaik Misba (A1 to A6) CR.26/2023 vs S.H.O Railway kodur	06 Feb 2023	Order	—
AS/2/2021	Akkireddy Lalithamma vs Paturu Lakshmamma	02 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
AS/21/2019	Mummadi Nagendra Reddy vs Mummadi Swarnalatha	02 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
EP/12/2022	M/s Shriram City Union Fin Ltd rep by its GPA A Venkataiah vs U. Chandra Sekhar Reddy (R2) EP against R2 only	01 Feb 2023	Order	—
OS/21/2017	Katam Surendra Babu vs Penigalapati Atchamma and another	01 Feb 2023	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/1/2023	Uppalapati Subramanaym raju(A1 to A4) vs S.H.O Chitvel P.S	01 Feb 2023	Order	—
SC/91/2022	SHO Nandalur PS vs Siddavatam Narasaiah	31 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
AS/11/2022	Anugolu Gurumurthy vs Dhulipati Raghavulu	30 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
SC/435/2019	The Inspector of Police, Rajampet vs Desaboina chandra sekhar	30 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
AS/59/2018	Gali Siddmma and another vs Maddipatla Pedda Subbamma and 2 others	25 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/14/2018	Rampa Rani vs Mukka Bhargava Reddy	25 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
MVOP/20/2022	Kanchara Pava Kumar Reddy vs M. Kanakaraj	24 Jan 2023	Order	—
OS/8/2016	Surappagari Tirupalu vs Gudaru Naraiah Naidu	24 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
EP/61/2021	M/s Shriram City Unior Finance Limited. vs Kalesha Shaik	23 Jan 2023	Order	—
AS/4/2017	Pothuraju Amarendra and two others vs Vandavasi Ramalingeswara Prasad	20 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
MVOP/6/2022	Vagga Revathi vs Kumbha Venkata Ramana	19 Jan 2023	Order	—
G.W.O.P/22/2022	Shaik Salma Begum vs NIL	19 Jan 2023	Order	—
AS/46/2018	Onteddu Siva Reddy vs Kataru Subba Reddy adn 14 Others	18 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/19/2015	Modugula Penchalaiah vs Avula Vijayalakshmi	18 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
CRLA/68/2022	Pullaganti Jagadish(C.C.No.272/2019 JFCM RJPT) vs S.H.O Chitvel P.S	18 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
CRLA/82/2022	shaik Muneer Basha(A1) in cc 78/2018 JFCM NDL vs S.H.O Nandalur	17 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
MVOP/13/2021	Arlagadda Parvathamma and 02 others vs Rizwan Ali and 02 others	12 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
CRLMP.BAIL/288/2022	B.Shiva Teja(A1) CR.no.327/2022 vs S.H.O Rly kodur P.S	06 Jan 2023	Order	—
EP/14/2022	M/s Shriram City Union Fin. Ltd rep by its GPA A. Venkataiah vs R2) B. Lakshmi Narayana (EP against R2 only)	05 Jan 2023	Order	—
EP/23/2022	M/s Shriram City Union Fin. Ltd rep by its A.Venkataiah vs Yarava Rama Subbaiah	05 Jan 2023	Order	—
SC/91/2020	The State SHO, Rajampet Police Station vs Pagadala naresh	05 Jan 2023	Judgement	—
OS/14/2016	Smt. Gangaraju Sudha Mani vs Smt. Gangaraju Rama Lakshumma and 6 anothers	02 Jan 2023	Judgement	—

Showing 100 of 1,785 orders — Log in to browse all pages.

Monthly Orders (Last 12 Months)

Apr 2023		18
Mar 2023		41
Feb 2023		30
Jan 2023		23
Dec 2022		27
Nov 2022		23
Oct 2022		21
Sep 2022		56
Aug 2022		43
Jul 2022		73
Jun 2022		49
May 2022		28

Frequently Asked Questions

How many cases has Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna handled?

Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna has handled 1820 court orders since 2020 at III Add Dist Court Complex Rajampet. The average disposal rate is 54 orders per month.

What types of cases does Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna hear?

Based on available records, Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna primarily handles Civil matters (Execution Petitions, Appeal Suits) and Criminal matters (Criminal Appeals, Sessions Cases) and Motor Accident matters (Motor Accident Claims) at III Add Dist Court Complex Rajampet.

Where is Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna currently posted?

Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna is posted as III Additional District Judge, Rajampet at III Add Dist Court Complex Rajampet, Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh.

Are judgments by Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna available online?

Yes. 5 judgments by Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna are available on Legistro with full text, outcome, and sections cited.

How fast does Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna dispose cases?

Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna disposes approximately 54 cases per month, based on 1820 orders handled over their tenure at III Add Dist Court Complex Rajampet.

Since when is Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna serving?

Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna has been serving at III Add Dist Court Complex Rajampet since 2020.

Case Types

CRLMP 65%

EP 19%

AS 5%

MVOP 3%

OS 3%

CRLA 2%

SC 2%

CMA 1%

Posting History

Jul 2020 — Apr 2023

III Additional District Judge, Rajampet · 1,820 orders

Outcomes on Record

Dismissed Disposal Date: 24-04-2023 Iii Additional District 1

Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution Disposal Date: 20-04-2023 1

Dismissed Disposal Date: 20-04-2023 Iii Additional District 1

Allowed 1

Other Judges at this Court

Sri S.Praveen Kumar

III Additional District Judge, Rajampet

196 orders

Smt.Nakka Lavanya

Principal Senior Civil Judge, Rajampet

0 orders

Sri P.Rajan Uday Prakash

Junior Civil Judge, Rajampet

678 orders

← View all judges at III Add Dist Court Complex Rajampet

Sri R.V.V.S.Murali Krishna

Criminal Revision Petition No.12 of 2023

Order in Criminal Revision Petition No.12 of 2023

O R D E R

in Crl.A.No.1512 of 2010 arised out of SLP (Criminal 4684

State of Telangana and another, reported in 2019(1)

Daily Status

Daily Status

Daily Status