Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Y.LAKSHMANA RAO
Kottevalla Jayaprakash Reddy @ Jaya @ Reddy, S/O. Munirathnam – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep By Its public prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati – Respondent
ORDER :
Y. LAKSHMANARAO, J.
The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS ’) [ Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C’)] seeking to enlarge the petitioners/Accused Nos.3 and 4 on bail in S.C.No.110 of 2016 on the file of learned VI Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum- Special Court for trial of offences against Women, Chittoor, which arose out of Crime No.130/2015 of I Town Police Station, Chittoor.
2. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Chittoor/Investigating Officer after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against Petitioners and twenty one others for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147 , 148, 302, 307, 326, 120-B, 109 read with 149, 212, 216 and 201 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for brevity ‘the I.P.C.,’), Sections 25(1A), 25(1AAA), 25(1B)(a), 25(1B)(c), 27(3) and 30 of the ARMS ACT , 1959 (for brevity ‘the Act’). The Petitioners were arrested by the Investigating Officer on 24.11.2015. Since then, they have been in the judicial custody.
3. Provenance of the case of the prosecution as emanated from the averments of
Bail for accused involved in heinous crimes requires careful assessment of individual roles and public safety, with parity not considered if roles differ significantly.
The principle of parity in bail applications requires careful consideration of the accused's specific role and circumstances, rather than being an absolute basis for granting bail.
The court determined that prolonged detention does not automatically entitle an accused to bail when substantial evidence of guilt exists, underscoring the rights to a speedy trial within serious cri....
Under UA(P) Act Section 43D(5), bail denied if charge-sheet shows prima facie true accusations of terrorist gang involvement; custody/delay insufficient absent changed circumstances; parity only for ....
Bail under the U.A.P. Act requires prima facie assessment of allegations; long custody or parity with co-accused do not automatically justify release.
Prolonged incarceration and delay in trial can justify the grant of bail, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The court ruled that the applicant, as the prime accused in serious offences, cannot be granted bail due to the risk of trial tampering and his history of absconding, despite delays in the trial proc....
Point of law : discretion for grant of bail must be exercised cautiously while considering the bail petitions of the nature being dealt with.
Prolonged detention without trial is unjust, and the right to a speedy trial must be upheld, leading to the granting of bail.
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
