Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V R K Krupa Sagar, J.
Vishal Gunni - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh rep. by Its Public Prosecutor - Respondent
Criminal Petition No: 6734 of 2024
Decided On : 07-01-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 482 - Anticipatory bail - Multiple petitions filed by police officers and an advocate seeking anticipatory bail in connection with a case involving serious allegations including conspiracy and false FIRs - The court emphasized the importance of fair investigation and the legal flaws in the registration of multiple FIRs. (Paras 1, 11, 19, 30)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 195 - The court ruled that the registration of a second FIR concerning the same incident is barred unless initiated by the court involved in the first FIR, highlighting the procedural safeguards in criminal justice. (Paras 22, 30)
Facts of the case:
The petitions arise from Crime No.469 of 2024, which was registered following allegations of a false case initiated against the petitioners, who include police officers and an advocate. The case involves accusations of conspiracy and misconduct in the investigation of a prior FIR. (Paras 1, 11, 19)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioners had made out a case for anticipatory bail, citing legal flaws in the registration of the second FIR and the need for fair investigation. (Paras 31, 32)
Issues: The main issues included the legality of multiple FIRs and the procedural validity of the investigation conducted by the police. (Paras 22, 30)
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the registration of the second FIR was flawed as it was not initiated by the appropriate court, emphasizing the necessity of adhering to procedural norms in criminal investigations. (Paras 30, 31)
Result: All Criminal Petitions are allowed, granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners under specified conditions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. criminal petition details (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments by counsel (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. details of accused (Para 12 , 13) |
| 4. concerns about investigation (Para 14) |
| 5. background of the case (Para 15) |
| 6. timeline of events (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 7. prosecution's arguments (Para 19) |
| 8. defense arguments (Para 20 , 21) |
| 9. legal standards for fir (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 10. legal reasoning (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 11. court's decision (Para 32) |
ORDER :
V R K Krupa Sagar, J.
1. The Criminal Petition No.6640 of 2024, under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ), is filed by the petitioner/A.3 - Sri Kanthi Rana Tata, I.P.S., IGP, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.469 of 2024 of Ibrahimpatnam Police Station, N.T.R. District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 192, 211, 218, 220, 354(D), 467, 420, 469, 471, 166, 166-A and 349 read with 120B I.P.C. and Section 66(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 .
2. Sri S.Sriram, the learned Senior Counsel being assisted by Sri T.Nagarjuna Reddy, the learned counsel for petitioner submitted arguments and cited legal authorities. Sri D.Srinivas, learned Advocate General, Sri M.Lakshmi Narayana, the learned Public Prosecutor and Sri A.Sai Rohit and Sri Neelothpal Ganji, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State submitted arguments. Sri Prabhunath Vasireddy and Sri Narra Srinivasa Rao, the learned counsels for respondent No.2 submitted arguments. The counters are filed on behalf of respondent No.1 and 2.
3. The Criminal Petition No.6702 of 2024, under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ), is filed by the petitioner/A.5 – Sri M.Satyanarayana, Inspector of Police, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.469 of 2024 of Ibrahimpatnam Police Station, N.T.R. District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 192, 211, 218, 220, 354(D), 467, 420, 469, 471, 166, 166-A and 349 read with 120B I.P.C. and Section 66(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 .
4. Sri Vinodh Kumar Deshpande, the learned Senior Counsel being assisted by Sri Aneel Kumar Dasari, the learned counsel for petitioner submitted arguments and cited legal authorities. Sri D.Srinivas, learned Advocate General, Sri M.Lakshmi Narayana, the learned Public Prosecutor, Sri A.Sai Rohit and Sri Neelothpal Ganji, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State submitted arguments. Sri Prabhunath Vasireddy and Sri Narra Srinivasa Rao, the learned counsels for respondent No.2 submitted arguments. The counters are filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2.
5. The Criminal Petition No 6734 of 2024, under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ), is filed by the petitioner/A.6 – Sri Vishal Gunni, I.P.S., D.I.G., seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.469 of 2024 of Ibrahimpatnam Police Station, N.T.R. District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 192, 211, 218, 220, 354(D), 467, 420, 469, 471, 166, 166-A and 349 read with 120B I.P.C. and Section 66(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 .
6. Sri O.Manohar Reddy, the learned Senior Counsel being assisted by Sri P.Raj Kumar, the learned counsel for petitioner submitted arguments and cited legal authorities. Sri D.Srinivas, learned Advocate General, Sri M.Lakshmi Narayana, the learned Public Prosecutor, Sri A.Sai Rohit and Sri Neelothpal Ganji, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State submitted arguments and counter is filed on behalf of respondent No.1/State.
7. The Criminal Petition No 6802 of 2024, under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ), is filed by the petitioner/A.4 – Sri K.Hanumantha Rao, D.S.P., seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.469 of 2024 of Ibrahimpatnam Police Station, N.T.R. District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections
The registration of multiple FIRs concerning the same incident is barred unless initiated by the court involved in the first FIR, ensuring adherence to procedural safeguards in criminal justice.
The court granted anticipatory bail to police officers and an advocate due to procedural irregularities in the investigation and emphasized the necessity of a complaint from the court for certain off....
The court affirmed that serious fraud allegations necessitate custodial interrogation, and delay in FIR does not negate the urgency for investigation.
The court established that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised cautiously to prevent abuse of legal processes, especially in light of evidence revealing malicious prosecutio....
The court dismissed anticipatory bail petitions due to the serious nature of allegations against the petitioner, emphasizing the need for custodial interrogation and the risk of witness tampering.
(1) Any aggrieved person can alert court about commission of a crime committed with intent to mislead court or to scuttle proceedings pending before it.(2) If other offences are interwoven and insepa....
The judgment emphasizes the need for fair investigation and clarifies the exceptional circumstances for transferring investigation to the CBI.
The court emphasized the need for custodial interrogation based on prima facie evidence of forgery, and highlighted the balance between personal liberty and societal interest in granting anticipatory....
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
