SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(AP) 1413

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K Sreenivasa Reddy, J.
Yeddula Bhaskar Reddy, and Others – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and another – Respondents
Criminal Petition No: 3916/2024
Decided On : 01-07-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: D Purnachandra Reddy
For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor, P Sai Surya Teja

Prolonged detention without identification of accused is unjustified; bail granted to petitioners with conditions.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 148, 307, 332, 324, 427, 120B read with 149 - Criminal Petition for bail - Petitioners arrested and in judicial remand for over 45 days - Major portion of investigation completed - No specific overt acts against petitioners - Video evidence available - Bail granted with conditions. (Paras 1, 12, 14, 15)

(B) Bail - Conditions for granting bail - The court emphasized that prolonged detention without identification of accused is unwarranted, and the petitioners are permanent residents with no flight risk. (Paras 12, 14)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners were arrested in connection with a violent incident involving a preplanned attack on the de facto complainant and his associates at Sri Padmavathi Mahila University, resulting in injuries to the complainant and his gunman. (Paras 3, 4)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioners had been in judicial remand for over 45 days without identification of the other assailants, and there were no specific overt acts against them. (Paras 12, 14)

Issues: The main issues were whether the petitioners should be granted bail given the circumstances of their arrest and the ongoing investigation. (Paras 11, 12)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prolonged detention of the petitioners without identification of the other accused was unjustified, and emphasized the need for a fair assessment of bail conditions. (Paras 12, 14)

Result: Criminal Petition is allowed.

ORDER :

K Sreenivasa Reddy, J.

This Criminal Petition, under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C., has been filed by the petitioners herein/A8 and A9, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.75 of 2024 of SVU Campus Police Station, Tirupathi District.

2. A case has been registered against the petitioners herein/A8 and A9 and other accused for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 332, 324, 427, 120B read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity ‘IPC’).

3. Brief facts of the case of prosecution are that, on 14.05.2024 at 3.00 PM at the premises of Sri Padmavathi Mahila University, Tirupati, the de facto complainant went to Sri Padmavathi Mahila University, Tirupati in his car bearing registration No.AP03 CD 6688 along with his gunman, driver viz. Ranjith and his attendant Saravana to attend the strong room inspection at the time of deposit of EVM boxes and its preservation procedure. At that time, when he was about to reach at a near distance to the strong room, the followers of MLA viz. C.Bhaskar Reddy and his son C.Mohit Reddy, his followers A1 and A2 along with his men with a criminal conspiracy and common intention, armed with deadly weapons i.e. hammer, iron rods, beer bottles and cricket bats were alleged to have attacked them by obstructing his car. They were alleged to have damaged the car and attempted to commit murder of de facto complainant by hacking and beating him with deadly weapons. A1 and A2 were alleged to have attacked him and caused injuries to his left shoulder and caused dumb injuries on his body and when his gunman came to his rescue, A1 was alleged to have beat him with a big hammer and tried to kill him and caused grievous injury. Basing on the report of de facto complainant, a case in Crime No.75 of 2024 of SVU Campus, Tirupathi District was registered for the alleged offences and investigated into.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners herein/A8 and A9 contends that petitioners herein/A8 and A9 were arrested on 16.05.2024 and since then, they are in judicial remand. Major portion of investigation has been completed except filing of charge sheet.

5. On the other hand, Sri P.Sai Surya Teja, learned counsel for the de facto complainant contends that the entire incident is videographed and on perusal of the said video goes to show that it is a preplanned attack on the de facto complainant and another in order to eliminate them.

6. On the contrary, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contends that all the accused in a mob attacked the de facto complainant. According to him, the police have to identify the assailants by watching the videograph, unless the Test Identification Parade is conducted, it is difficult to identify them. He further submits that along with de facto complainant, one public servant viz. Dharani Kumar was also got injured.

7. Heard both sides. Perused the record.

8. On the date of the incident, the contesting candidate, who is de facto complainant and another went to Sri Padmavathi Mahila University, Tirupathi in his car along with his gunman to attend the strong room inspection at the time of deposit of EVM boxes and its preservation as per the schedule served to him. The accused conspired together and with a common intention, armed with deadly weapons had damaged the car and attempted to beat with rods and beer bottles. A1 and A2 were alleged to have attacked the de facto complainant and caused injury to his left shoulder and dumb injuries on his body parts. On seeing the same, the gunman of the de facto complainant had come to his rescue. It is alleged that A1 and A2 attacked him and caused grievous injuries to him. At that point of time, the gunman has opened fire and the assailants ran away by leaving their vehicles.

9. This Court has perused the Wound Certificate of public servant viz. M.Dharani Kumar and de facto complainant viz. Pullivarthi Venkata Muni Prasad. Insofar as the Wound Certificate in respect of de facto complainant viz. Pullivarthi Venkata Muni Prasad, the D

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top