IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
V. R. K. KRUPA SAGAR, J.
Mr. Vallabhneni Vamsi Mohan – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of A.P. – Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 5671 Of 2024
Decided On : 20-02-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 438 - Anticipatory bail - Petitioner sought anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.137 of 2023 for offences under IPC and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Allegations of political vendetta and inadequate investigation were raised - Court found that jurisdiction for anticipatory bail lies with Special Courts under Section 14A of the Act, 1989, thus dismissing the petition. (Paras 1, 13, 31, 39)
(B) Jurisdiction - High Court's jurisdiction under Sections 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. is limited by Section 14A of the Act, 1989 - Anticipatory bail petitions must be filed before Special Courts, not the High Court. (Paras 31, 32)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail for alleged involvement in a politically motivated crime incident involving violence against a political party's office, with claims of false accusations and political vendetta.
Findings of Court:
The Court ruled that the High Court does not have original jurisdiction for anticipatory bail in cases involving the Act, 1989, and dismissed the petition.
Issues: Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail under the Act, 1989, and whether conflicting judgments require referral to a larger bench.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that anticipatory bail applications must be made to Special Courts as per Section 14A of the Act, 1989, and the High Court's jurisdiction is appellate only.
Result: Criminal Petition dismissed.
ORDER :
(V.R.K. KRUPA SAGAR, J.)
This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ) ( Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure), is filed by the petitioner/A.71 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.137 of 2023 of Gannavaram Urban Police Station, Krishna District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 435 and 506 read with 149 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 . Thereafter, the police, on the strength of the material collected, added Sections 436, 450, 452 and 120B of I.P.C and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 .
2. Heard arguments of Ms. V.Devi Satya Sri, the learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Siddarth Luthra, the learned Senior Counsel appearing online and Sri M.Lakshmi Narayana, the learned Public Prosecutor and Sri K.Sandeep, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent-State.
3. As against the above anticipatory bail petition, a detailed counter was filed by the respondent-State.
4. This criminal petition pertains to Crime No.137 of 2023 of Gannavaram Urban Police Station. By this petition the accused/A.71 prays for pre-arrest bail. The crime incident allegedly occurred on 20.02.2023. Upon a written information dated 22.02.2023 F.I.R.No.137 of 2023 was registered. The scene of offence was Telugu Desam Party office, Gannavaram. Sri Mudunuri Satyavardhan belonging to Madiga caste, which is a scheduled caste, was computer operator working in Telugu Desam Party office and living in the said office.
5. During the time when this crime incident allegedly occurred the party in power was YSR Congress Party. Investigation commenced and went on for some time. Thereafter there were general elections and the then opposition party/Telugu Desam Party got the mandate and came into power. Thereafter investigation continued further. The allegations and counter allegations in this case disclosed the rift between both the political parties. Petitioners contend that this is a case falsely alleged against him out of political vendetta. According to the State, for political reasons there was inadequate investigation soon after commission of the offence. By the time this crime incident occurred the petitioner/Sri Vallabhaneni Vamsi Mohan was Member of Legislative Assembly for Gannavaram Assembly Constituency.
6. The version of the prosecution is that on 18.02.2023 during afternoon hours a press meet was held by Sri Vallabhaneni Vamsi Mohan wherein he allegedly made certain insulting remarks as against Sri N.Chandrababu Naidu, Sri Nara Lokesh and their family members and used indecent language. In response to it, certain leaders of Telugu Desam Party conducted a press meeting on 19.02.2023 in the morning hours and condemned the statements made by the opponent political party people.
7. In the above backdrop of facts, the crime incident allegedly occurred. It is stated that on 20.02.2023 at about 5:00 P.M. Sri Vallabhaneni Vamsi Mohan went to Telugu Desam Party office and on noticing followers of Telugu Desam Party he caused enquiries about Mr. Pattabhi of Telugu Desam Party and warned them that they would finish Telugu Desam Party and left the place.
8. In the next 30 minutes at about 5:30 P.M. about 100 persons belonging to YSR Congress Party came to Telugu Desam Party office wielding sticks, stones, petrol bottles and various other arms and while hailing Sri Vallabhaneni Vamsi Mohan they attacked the party office. They threw stones, entered the party office and destroyed the furniture, broke two computers and two televisions and caused tremendous panic among everyone available there. In the first information report the de facto complainant was able to mention the names of 44 accused. It also made a mention about four named accused who came upon him and abused him by his caste name. The fu
Anticipatory bail applications under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act must be filed in Special Courts, not the High Court, as per Section 14A.
Anticipatory bail petitions under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are not maintainable unless prima facie evidence exists, as per Sections 18 and 18....
The jurisdiction for anticipatory bail in caste atrocity cases is reserved for special courts under the Scheduled Castes Act, reaffirming the necessity for prima facie evidence for jurisdictional app....
The court ruled that anticipatory bail cannot be granted in cases involving allegations under the SC/ST Act, as per Section 14A, which bars such petitions.
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail under the SC/ST Act, necessitating an appeal against the Special Court's decision if bail is denied.
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail under the SC/ST Act when a prima facie case exists, as remedies lie in appealing the Special Court's decision.
Point of law : Even if the bare reading of the FIR/ complaint indicates that prima facie provisions of the Act are not found to be attracted, then harmonious construction of Section 438 of the Code o....
Anticipatory bail can be granted if no prima facie case of caste atrocity is established, despite the restrictions under the SC and ST Act.
Anticipatory bail petitions are maintainable for offences with a penalty of up to seven years, and jurisdictional courts must adjudicate these applications rather than merely disposing them without c....
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.