GANDLA RAVINDER vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THROUGH THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE — Crl.A. No. 893/2012
Case under Section II. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010184632011
Filing Date
16-Jun-2011
Registration No
Crl.A. No. 893/2012
Diary Number
18463/2011
Order Date
13-Sep-2023
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 06-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.GANDLA RAVINDER
Adv. ANU GUPTA
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THROUGH THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
Adv. S.. UDAYA KUMAR SAGAR[R-1]
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Sep-2023
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Sep-2023
Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week
Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M. Sundresh and Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala
-
31-Aug-2023
Fixed Date by Court
Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M. Sundresh and Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala
-
23-Aug-2023
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
23-Aug-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
30-Sep-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
30-Sep-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
29-Sep-2015
Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Sep-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Sep-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Oct-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Oct-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
20-Aug-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
05-May-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
17-Apr-2014
Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Mar-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Mar-2014
Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF
-
03-Mar-2014
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
01-Oct-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
02-Jul-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Dec-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
21-Oct-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Aug-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Jun-2011
Case filed
Registration No. Crl.A. No. 893/2012
Supreme Court dismissed Gandla Ravinder's appeal on September 13, 2023, upholding his conviction under Section 302 IPC for stabbing the deceased multiple times over an election-related dispute. The Court found eyewitness testimony and recovery evidence sufficient to confirm guilt. However, noting 18 years of incarceration, the Court directed the State to consider his case for premature release. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts