DR Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy Vs State of AP and Ors On 01 June 2017
DR Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy Vs State of AP and Ors On 01 June 2017
DR Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy Vs State of AP and Ors On 01 June 2017
ORDER:
The police originally filed the charge sheet for above penal
Court under Section 173 (8) CrPC and filed additional charge sheet
by including the offence under Sections 406 & 420 IPC. The trial
charges for the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC and
Sections 406 & 420 IPC, the accused faced trial. It is after
charges under Sections 406 & 420 IPC were not framed originally
17.04.2013 and non filing of the petition earlier is not willful and
additional charge sheet and after hearing and later trial was
charge, the prosecution could have been moved earlier and at this
stage when the matter is posted for judgment, the petition filed to
dismissal.
while framing charges did not draw his attention to the additional
charge sheet filed by police for the offence under Sections 406 &
420 IPC and the additional charge sheet filed by police was not
even drawn attention of the present Judge earlier and the act of
the Court shall prejudice no man apart from the power of the
Court under Section 216 CrPC to alter or add or delete any charge
the offence under Sections 406 & 420 IPC and thereby the
CrPC.
3 Dr.SSRB,J
Crl.R.C.No.661 of 2017
charges framed after hearing both sides and later trial was
under Sections 406 & 420 IPC and thereby he is proceeding under
Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3 & 4 DP Act and the prosecution
of the Assistant Public Prosecutor under Section 216 CrPC and the
invoking Section 216 CrPC and lower Court ought not to have been
material to frame any additional charges under Sections 406 & 420
aside.
victim written report dated 10.03.2011 was for the offence under
Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of DP Act and the police
after investigation filed charge sheet for the offences supra and
during the hearing before charges only the 1st charge material was
who were not cited in the 1st charge sheet and cited in the 2nd
interfere.
of the defacto complainant saying the wife of A.1- the alleged victim
did not present any report to the police in registering the crime
5 Dr.SSRB,J
Crl.R.C.No.661 of 2017
supra, but for by her father and it is a case to call for report of the
record.
reserved the matter for judgment after full dressed trial and from
framed under Sections 406 & 420 IPC. If at all the Court wanted to
not even done in this case. It was the learned Public Prosecutor at
to file the application, which could not be. Thus but for at best to
say said application is only to bring to the notice of the court the
the court. In fact the necessity if found by the Court and once
such is the case if at all; there is no need for the court to ask the
supra.
the Apex Court in Anant Prakash Sinha Vs. State of Haryana &
1
2016 (6) SCC 105
2
2017 (3) SCC 347
7 Dr.SSRB,J
Crl.R.C.No.661 of 2017
court to invoke the power under Section 216 CrPC and holding
Sections 406 & 420 IPC is held unsustainable and the same is set
powers and once chosen to do so under Section 216 CrPC, the trial
closed. No costs.
_____________________________________
JUSTICE Dr. B.SIVA SANKARA RAO
Date: 01.06.2017
ska
3
2013 (100) SCC 591