HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.801 of 2001 Date:08.07.2010 Between: Om Prakash Kedia and others … Petitioners and State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by Sub Inspector of Police, Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad and others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.801 OF 2001 JUDGMENT: This revision is directed against the judgment dated 15.06.2001 passed by the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, in C.C.No.173 of 1991. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the defacto complainant, 1st petitioner herein, filed a complaint before Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad, against the respondents 2 and 3 herein alleging the offences punishable under Sections 408, 414 and 201 IPC and the same was registered as Crime and after completion of investigation the police filed charge sheet and the same was taken on file by the learned V Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, as C.C.No.173 of 1991. During the course of trial, on behalf of prosecution, P.Ws.1 to 1 to 8 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.8 were marked. On behalf of defence, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced. After analyzing the said evidence, the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused, and accordingly, acquitted them of the said offence by judgment dated 15.06.2001. As against the said judgment, the State i.e., the Sub Inspector of Police, Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad, did not file any appeal and hence the defacto complainants filed this revision invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3. Heard both sides. 4. This Court admitted the revision and ordered notices to the unofficial respondents on 21.02.2002. As the notices sent to respondents 2 and 3 were not served, by an order dated 06.11.2009 this Court as a last chance permitted the learned counsel for the petitioners to furnish the correct address of respondents 2 and 3, failing which the Criminal Revision Case shall stand dismissed against the said respondents without reference to the Court and posted the case to 04.12.2009. Despite the same, the counsel for the petitioners did not furnish the correct address of respondents 2 and 3 and thus the revision in so far as respondents 2 and 3 are concerned was already dismissed on 06.11.2009. Now, the revision remains only against the State which is a formal party and no relief can be granted against the State. 5. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. _____________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 8th July, 2010 cbs HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.304 of 2001 (Dismissed) 8th July, 2010 cbs