Back
2018 Supreme(AP) 403
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
B. SIVA SANKARA RAO, J.
Smt. C. Hindumathi & Ors. - Petitioner
Versus
The State of A.P & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Petition Nos.12683, 24692 & 24695 of 2017
Decided On : 11-09-2018
For the Petitioner: Sri Kasa Jaganmohan Reddy.
For the Respondents: Special Assistant Public Prosecutor Sri T. Pradyumna Kumar Reddy
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code – Sections 147, 148, 324, 307, 302 r/w 149 – Criminal Produce Code – Section 439(2) – Land Encroachment Act – Section 7 – Respondents to three bail cancellation petitions are accused in Crl.P. accused Nos.6 & 9 in Crl.P. and accused in Crl.P. of crime No.31 of 2015 of Peddavaduguru Police Station, registered against 16 accused for offences punishable – Complainant is one Smt. C. Indumathi w/o late C.Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy of Appecherla Village, Peddavadugur Mandal, Anantapur District – Almost all accused are from same Mandal either from Appecherla or Thimmapuram Village particularly of A.1 – Police after investigation filed charge sheet against accused except for A.5 – Learned committal Magistrate taken cognizance and allotted PRC number from police final report with 20 witnesses which include the defacto complainant-LW1 w/o of the deceased Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy and circumstantial witnesses including on the motive and the injured witnesses particularly LWs.9, 10 & 11 – In the course of investigation, accused were arrested and later enlarged on bail. Presently SC. is pending against the accused persons referred supra – Held, no doubt the paper clippings show it is outcome of political vendetta and to threaten witnesses group of accused by instigating at instance of MLA cause damaged to the huge property of defacto complainant and witnesses and also in cause issued notice under Section 7 of Land Encroachment Act in November 2017 – Further defacto complainant addressed trial court and superior police officer in this regard of the accused interference and life threat to witnesses, though that is not isolated factor so far as other accused including from a crime registered was later referred as discussed supra, but for against A1&2 as additional factor for cancellation of concession of bail granted to A1&2 from cogent material supra – Investigation was completed long back and charge sheet filed, case committed, sessions case number was allotted and sessions case is pending since 2016 though applications for cancellation of bail filed are in December 2017 by considering all these factors, so far as Accused persons A3, A4, A6 to A 16 concerned, they are directed not to interfere either directly or indirectly with any of witnesses in any manner either by meeting them or by threatening them either personally and physically or by having calls or messages or the like or by sending any persons – Expressions referred supra shows Court got power to sub serve ends of justice even to modify existing conditions of bail order where not cancelled, thereby the accused persons are directed to appear before the SHO on every alternative Sunday for assurance of their availability and non-interference with witnesses till end of trial – If at all there is any cogent material in future, either defacto complainant or any of the witnesses are entitled to move court with such foundation for court to consider even against any of them and for that this common order no way comes in the way – Order accordingly.
1. The respondents to the three bail cancellation petitions are accused Nos.1, 2 & 4 in Crl.P.No.24695 of 2017, accused Nos.6 & 9 in Crl.P.No.24692 of 2017 and accused Nos.3, 7, 8 & 10 to 16 in Crl.P.No.12683 of 2017, of crime No.31 of 2015 of Peddavaduguru Police Station, registered against 16 accused for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 324, 307, 302 r/w 149 IPC and Section 120-B IPC.
2. The defacto complainant is one Smt. C. Indumathi w/o late C.Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy of Appecherla Village, Peddavadugur Mandal, Anantapur District. Almost all accused are from the same Mandal either from Appecherla or Thimmapuram Village particularly of A.1. The police after investigation filed charge sheet against the accused except for A.5. The learned committal Magistrate taken cognizance and allotted PRC number from the police final report with 20 witnesses which include the defacto complainant-LW1 w/o of the deceased Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy and the circumstantial witnesses including on the motive and the injured witnesses particularly LWs.9, 10 & 11. In the course of investigation, the accused were arrested and later enlarged on bail. Presently SC.No.421 of 2016 is pending against the accused persons referred supra. So far as accused Nos.3, 7, 8 & 10 to 16 concerned they were granted bail by order of this Court another bench in Crl.P.No.5134 of 2015 dated 17.06.2015 with observations of these accused are in jail for past 75 days and the main accusation is against A1,2&4, hence to release on self bond for Rs.10,000/- with two sureties to the satisfaction of JFCM, Gooty and to stay at Anantapur and not to enter the village till filing of the charge sheet. So far as accused Nos.6 & 9 concerned, they were also granted bail on same day 17.06.2015 in Crl.P.No.5153 of 2015 with same observations by same bench of this Court supra. So far as accused Nos.1, 2 & 4 concerned, they were also released on bail in Crl.P.No.6095 of 2015 dated 13.07.2015 with observation of they are in custody since 07.04.2015 and the investigation is likely to be completed and on condition of execution of self bond with two sureties to the satisfaction of JFCM, Gooty and in directing the petitioners shall before the SHO on every day between 10.00 am and 05.00 pm until further orders.
3. The three present petitions filed in the third week of December 2017 by the defacto complainant are under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. in seeking cancellation of the bail orders granted supra to the accused persons respectively.
4. In the applications for cancellation of the regular bails granted supra, the averments of the defacto complainant are that the deceased was elected single window president in February 2015 and he along with defacto complainant and others went to the society office for meeting at 10.00 AM, the accused who were already present at the office demanded to appoint co-option members for which the deceased replied of it was not his business and the accused wanted to settle the issue otherwise to kill him and they were exchanges where accused attacked the defacto complainant with sticks already brought in their vehicles and they killed the deceased on the spot having attacked the defacto complainant.
5. So far as cancellation of bail concerned what is averred is that the accused, who were enlarged on bail are posing threat to life and property of the defacto complainant and witnesses. Her husband belongs to YSRCP and he was the Chairman of PACS, Kristipadu. The local TDP MLA and other accused of the crime were threatening the deceased to step down from his office or to join for TDP for which as he refused he was brutally murdered in the Office and LW.9 was one of those seriously injured. Among the accused persons, A.2 is a life convict in SC.No.280 of 1988 on the file of learned Sessions Judge, Anantapur and was released on remission by Government of AP and he is personal aide of JC Prabhakar Reddy, MLA, Tadipathri, and a notorious rowdy with rowdy sheet No.172
