Allu Arjun’s Court Appearance at Sandhya Theater Trample Case Adjourned Till July 29 |

‘Raaka’ star Both Arjun appeared before the Nampally Magistrate’s Court on Monday, July 6, 2026, in the notorious Sandhya Theater riot case. The cases stemmed from the riots that followed the screening of his popular film Pushpa: The Rule in Hyderabad, which led to the death of a 35-year-old woman, Revathi, and serious injuries to her son. The Chikkadpally police issued a comprehensive warrant against 23 people and named the National Award-winning actor as Accused Number 11; Theater managers are made up of Cases 1 to 10.

All of them Arjun It appears through a video conference

According to an IANS report, Allu Arjun attended the meeting through video. The legal team also said that the other two accused are at large and have lodged a complaint. After hearing the matter, the court adjourned the case until July 29.

What was the event of oppression?

For the uninitiated, a near miss occurred at Sandhya Theater where a large crowd had gathered to watch the actor, resulting in the death of 35-year-old Revathi and serious injuries to her eight-year-old son. Earlier, on 22 June, the Nampally court adjourned the case till 6 July when some of the accused failed to appear before the Magistrate. At the meeting, Allu Arjun did not appear, and his lawyer filed a petition on his behalf.

Police issued a warrant

The Chikkadpally police have named Allu Arjun as Accused Number 11 in the case. The management of Sandhya Stadium has been listed as Accused Nos. 1 to 10. The Nampally court issued summons to 19 accused persons. The police also issued a charge sheet against 23 people in this case. After the accident, he announced financial assistance to the victim’s family. A film producer All Aravind said that Rs 2 crore will be given to help Revathi’s family. The case is still ongoing, and the next hearing is scheduled for July 29.Disclaimer: The information in this report is based on legal cases reported by a third party. The information provided represents predictions made by the parties involved and is not a guaranteed fact. The case is ongoing, and the final decision has not yet been reached. This book does not claim that what it says is true.