ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATI
Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J.
Relangi Venkatesh – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 800 of 2022
Decided On : 18-02-2022
Identification - Bail - The court found that the accusation made against the petitioner was not prima facie well founded due to serious dispute over the identity of the person at the scene of the offence. The petitioner was granted pre-arrest bail.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as the sole accused in a case under Section 7B r/w 8a of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020, for alleged involvement in manufacturing illicit liquor. The prosecution's case was based on the identification of the petitioner as the person who ran away from the scene of the offence upon seeing the police.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accusation against the petitioner was not prima facie well founded due to serious dispute over the identity of the person at the scene of the offence. Consequently, the petitioner was granted pre-arrest bail.
Issues: The key issue was the validity of the identification of the petitioner as the person who ran away from the scene of the offence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the serious dispute over the identity of the person at the scene of the offence, leading to the finding that the accusation against the petitioner was not well founded.
Final Decision: The Criminal Petition was allowed, and the petitioner was granted pre-arrest bail upon the event of his arrest in the above crime, subject to certain conditions.
JUDGMENT
Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J. - This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest.
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.1772 of 2021 of Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Rajamahendravaram South, East Godavari District. a case under Section 7B r/w 8a of the andhra Pradesh Prohibition (amendment) act, 2020, was registered against him in the above crime.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that on receipt of information relating to manufacturing of illicit liquor, that when the police reached the scene of offence, that one person, who was present at the scene of offence, ran away from the scene of offence after seeing the police and that the police have identified the said person, who ran away as the petitioner herein. Therefore, the petitioner is shown as accused in the above crime.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
5. admittedly, the petitioner herein was not found at the scene of offence. as per the version of the prosecution, one person who was found at the scene of offence, ran away after seeing the police. So, it is stated that the police have identified the person who ran away as the petitioner herein. There is no valid basis for the said identification. Therefore, the very identity of the person, who ran away from the said place, is in serious dispute. So, in the said facts and circumstances of the case, the accusation made against the petitioner is not prima facie well founded. Therefore, he is entitled for pre-arrest bail.
6. Resultantly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. In the event of the arrest of the petitioner in the above crime, he shall be forthwith released on bail on execution of self bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Rajamahendravaram South, East Godavari District. On his release, the petitioner shall appear before the Station House Officer of Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Rajamahendravaram South, daily between 10-00 a.m. to 1-00 p.m. till the entire investigation in this case is completed and charge sheet is filed.
The validity of identification and the prima facie well-founded nature of the accusation are crucial in determining the grant of pre-arrest bail.
Lack of valid identification and dispute over the identity of the accused at the scene of the offence can entitle the accused to pre-arrest bail.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the validity of identification and the existence of a serious dispute regarding the identity of the accused can entitle the accused to pre-arr....
The validity of identification and the entitlement to pre-arrest bail based on the lack of valid basis for identification and serious dispute over the person's identity.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a valid basis for identification and the need for a prima facie well-founded accusation in granting pre-arrest bail.
The validity of identification and the disputed identity of the accused influenced the decision to grant pre-arrest bail.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.