The Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 438 and 442 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNSS’), seeking
to set aside the order dated 08.05.2026 framing charges in S.C.No.19 of 2026
on the file of the learned Special Court for Speedy Trial of Offences under the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Prakasam at Ongole.
2. Heard Sri C.Nageswar Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing Sri
Uday Kumar Vampugadavala, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Smt. Jyothi
Eswar Gogineni, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 and Sri A.Sai
Rohith, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.
3. Sri C.Nageswar Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing Sri Uday
Kumar Vampugadavala, learned Counsel for the Petitioners while reiterating
the grounds of revision, has submitted that the order framing charges is illegal,
irregular, and contrary to the material available on record. The Investigating
Officer found no prima facie material against the Petitioners and that they
were implicated only based on a second statement of the complainant
recorded after an unexplained delay of about eight months, which merely
repeated the earlier version. No material in the charge sheet, remand report,
or witness statements discloses the Petitioners’ involvement in the alleged
offences. The learned Senior Counsel also submits that the learned Trial
Court framed charges without conducting the mandatory hearing
Dr.YLR, J
Dated 06.07.2026
contemplated under Section 251(2) of ‘the BNSS.,’ thereby violating the
prescribed procedure. It is eventually concluded that in the absence of such
hearing and sufficient material, the learned Trial Court could not have formed
an opinion that there were grounds to presume the Petitioners had committed
the alleged offences. Therefore, it is urged that the order dated 08.05.2026
framing charges in S.C.No.19 of 2026 is liable to be set aside.
