Cherukuri Satyanarayana v. State Of A.P.,

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.637 OF 2018 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners/A.2 and 3, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State and perused the record.

The de facto complainant is not made as party in this case. If an order is passed without hearing the de facto complainant, it would cause prejudice. The de facto complainant is a necessary party to appreciate all the facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore, the petitioners are directed to implead the de facto complainant as respondent No.2 in this case.

At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that this revision can be disposed of with the above direction. So that, the petitioners can file a fresh criminal revision case impleading the de facto complainant as respondent No.2. In view of the submissions made, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of.

Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned order to the petitioners. The petitioners are granted liberty as prayed for.

The Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

___________________________ Dr. SHAMEEM AKTHER, J 18th April, 2018.

ssp