Back
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATI
Subba Reddy Satti, J.
Mataparthi Chandra Sekhar – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Petition Nos. 6476, 6492, 6495, 6496 and 6497 of 2022
Decided On : 30-08-2022
CRIMINAL BAIL - ANTICIPATORY BAIL - SECTIONS 146, 147, 307 IPC - UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY - RIOTING - ATTEMPT TO MURDER - CONFESSIONAL STATEMENTS - ADMISSIBILITY - CONDITIONS FOR GRANT OF BAIL - COURT'S DISCRETION
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner sought anticipatory bail in five criminal cases registered against him for offenses including unlawful assembly, rioting, and attempt to murder. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was part of a mob that gathered to protest a change in the name of a district and that the mob engaged in violence, damaging property and injuring police officers. The petitioner denied involvement in the violence and claimed that he was being falsely implicated based on the confessions of other accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no evidence of a common intention among the members of the mob to commit violence and that the petitioner was not specifically identified as having committed any overt acts. The court also noted that the confessional statements of other accused were inadmissible as evidence. The court concluded that the petitioner was entitled to anticipatory bail.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner was part of an unlawful assembly and engaged in rioting. 2. Whether the petitioner was guilty of attempt to murder. 3. Whether the confessional statements of other accused were admissible as evidence. 4. Whether the petitioner was entitled to anticipatory bail.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. To establish unlawful assembly and rioting, there must be a common intention among the members of the assembly to commit violence. In this case, there was no evidence of such a common intention. 2. To establish attempt to murder, there must be an intention to kill and an act that is sufficiently proximate to the intended killing. In this case, there was no evidence of such an intention or act. 3. Confessional statements made by an accused person to a police officer after the investigation has started are inadmissible as evidence. 4. The court has the discretion to grant anticipatory bail to an accused person if it is satisfied that the accused is not likely to abscond or tamper with evidence and that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is guilty of the offense.
Final Decision: The court granted the petitioner anticipatory bail on the condition that he execute a self-bond and two sureties, appear before the police station twice a week, and not contact the complainant or any witnesses.
JUDGMENT
Subba Reddy Satti, J. - These Criminal Petitions are filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with crime Nos. 126, 127 of 2022 of Amalapuram Tq Police Station, Crime Nos. 141, 139 and 140 of 2022 of Amalapuram Town Police Station, East Godavari District. The petitioner is arrayed as accused in the above crimes.
2. Crime No. 126 of 2022 is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 151, 155, 452, 436, 353, 332, 427, 188, 307 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3 & 4 of PDPPA, Section 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of SC & ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015.
3. Crime No. 127 of 2022 is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 452, 151, 436, 307 read with 149 of IPC, Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of SC & ST (POA) Amendment Act, 2015 and Section 32 of Police Act.
4. Crime No. 141 of 2022 is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 143, 144, 147, 148, 452, 436, 435, 188 read with 149 IPC, and Section 32 of Police Act.
5. Crime No. 139 of 2022 is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 143, 144, 147, 148, 151, 152, 332, 336, 427, 188, 353, 324, 435 read with 149 of IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of PDPP Act and 32 of Police Act, 1861.
6. Crime No. 140 of 2022 is registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 143, 144, 147, 148, 151, 336, 452, 188 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3 & 4 of PDPPA, Section 32 of Police Act.
7. The above crimes were registered basing on the reports lodged by Sub-inspector of Police, Crime No. 126 of 2022, basing on complaint lodged by watchman of the house of the Minister, Crime No. 127 of 2022 and basing on the complaint lodged by the brother of Mummadivaram MLA, Crime No. 141 of 2022, basing on the complaint lodged by the Village Revenue Officer of the 30th ward, Amalapuram Town, Crime No. 139 of 2022, and basing on the complaint lodged by the driver, A.P.S.R.T.C, Crime No. 140 of 2022 was registered.
8. The facts of above crime are inter-linked. Therefore, they are considered and decided by this common order.
The facts of the case in brief are:
On 24.05.2022 at about 4:00 P.M., on a call given by JAC of Konaseema Sadhana Committee, huge number of people gathered together for submitting objections pursuant to issuance of Gazette notification with regard to change of name of Konaseema District by violating the proceedings issued under Section 144 of Cr.P.C. and Section 30 of the Police Act. The mob started rally at Kalasam Centre, Amalapuram Town and proceeded to Clock Tower Centre and in the meanwhile various groups of public came from four corners to the clock tower centre and formed into a huge mob.
Thereafter the mob moved to Collectorate and on the way to Collectorate when the Police were discharging their duties, the mob pelted stones on the Police and burnt BVC collage bus which was used as transport vehicle for the Police.
Further when Police tried to control the mob at Collectorate, the mob pelted stones on Police personnel due to which some of the Police sustained injuries, damaged the glasses of Collectorate Office and Ambedkar Bhavan.
Thereafter, the mob proceeded to Red Bridge (Erra Vanthena), intercepted two RTC buses, damaged them and set fire to the buses.
The mob further moved towards the house of MLA and pelted stoned on the house due to which glasses were damage. When cousin of MLA tried to pacify the matter and while he was taking video of the situation, the mob poured petrol on him, but he managed to escape. Then the mob entered into the house of MLA, set fire to the motorcycles and entire furniture in the house including house. The petitioner is arrayed as one of the accused in the above crimes basing on the complaints lodged by respective persons referred to supra.
9. Though notice is required to be served on the victim as per the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
Confessional statements made by an accused person to a police officer after the investigation has started are inadmissible as evidence.
Confessional statements made by accused persons before a police officer after the investigation has started are inadmissible as evidence.
Anticipatory Bail – While considering prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, balance has to be struck between two factors; no prejudice should be caused to free, fair and full investigation and there....
In order to establish the offenses of unlawful assembly, rioting, and attempt to murder, the prosecution must prove that there was a common intention among the protestors to commit the offenses.
Point of Law : Impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in cases of large magnitude affecting a very large number of people.
The absence of specific overt acts against a petitioner amidst a large assembly precludes refusal of anticipatory bail under relevant IPC provisions.
The court holds that in order to establish an unlawful assembly under Section 141 of the IPC, there must be a common intention among the members of the assembly to commit an offense. The court also h....
In cases of unlawful assembly and rioting, the prosecution must establish that the accused had a common intention of committing an offence.
Confessional statements made by an accused person to a police officer after the investigation has started are inadmissible as evidence.
Pre-arrest bail can be granted where allegations are not supported by evidence on record.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
