Back
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATI
Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J.
Illa Srinu – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 1231 of 2022
Decided On : 04-03-2022
Pre-Arrest Bail - Illegal Possession of I.D. Liquor - The court allowed the criminal petition for pre-arrest bail as there was no valid basis for the identification of the accused at the scene of the offence, and the very identity of the person who ran away from the scene of the offence was in dispute.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was the sole accused in a case under Section 7-B read with Section 8-B of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2020, for illegal possession of I.D. liquor. The police found 20 litres of I.D. liquor in a mica bag at the scene of the offence, and the petitioner was identified as the person who ran away from the scene.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no valid basis for the identification of the petitioner at the scene of the offence, and the very identity of the person who ran away was in dispute. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled to 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, and whether the petitioner was entitled to pre-arrest bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of valid basis for the identification of the petitioner at the scene of the offence and the serious dispute regarding the identity of the person who ran away.
Final Decision: The criminal petition was allowed, and the petitioner was granted pre-arrest bail upon execution of a self bond for Rs.50,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each.
JUDGMENT
Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J. - This criminal petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C is filed to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest.
2. The petitioner is sole accused in Crime No.176/2022 of Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Rajamahendravaram South, Rajamahendravaram Urban District.
3. a case under Section 7-B read with Section 8-B of the andhra Pradesh Prohibition (amendment) act, 2020, was registered against him in the above crime.
4. Briefly stated, it is the case of the prosecution that on 06-02-2022 at about 06.00 p.m., when police reached the scene of offence after receipt of information relating to illegal possession of I.D. liquor that they have noticed one person with a mica bag standing at the scene of offence and that after seeing the police, the said person ran away after leaving the mica bag. Police found 20 litres of I.D. liquor in the said mica bag. It is stated that police came to know on enquiry that the petitioner is the person who ran away from the scene of offence. Therefore, he is shown as accused in the above crime.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
6. admittedly, the petitioner was not apprehended at the scene of offence while he was in possession of any such I.D. liquor. The person found at the scene of offence ran away. although it is stated that the police have identified the said person as the petitioner herein, there is no valid basis for the said identification. So, the very identity of the person who ran away from the scene of offence is a serious dispute. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for pre-arrest bail.
7. Resultantly, the criminal petition is allowed and in the event of arrest of the petitioner/sole accused 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.
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....
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 validity of identification and the disputed identity of the accused influenced the decision to grant pre-arrest bail.
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 validity of identification and the prima facie well-founded nature of the accusation are crucial in determining the grant of pre-arrest bail.
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 court granted pre-arrest bail under Section 438, considering the lack of substantial evidence and the petitioner's readiness to comply with investigation requirements.
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
