IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
T Mallikarjuna Rao, J.
Maddala Sakappa Murali - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO : 2 OF 2025
Decided On : 10-04-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accidental fire incident details. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. counsel arguments and submissions. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. petitioner's defense claims. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. criteria for anticipatory bail considerations. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 5. court's decision on bail application. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
ORDER :
T Mallikarjuna Rao, J.
1. The petitioner/A.2 has filed the Criminal Petition by invoking the provisions of Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, " BNS S ') seeking pre-arrest bail in case of his arrest concerning Crime No.135 of 2024, (relating to Accidental Fire) U/head altered to Section 326 (g), 316(5) & 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘ BNS ’) and section 4 of PDPP Act, 1984 of Madanapalli I Town Police Station, Annamayya District, now CID, RO, Tirupati.
2. The prosecution's case, as outlined in the complaint, in summary, is as follows:
(i) On 21.07.2024, at approximately 11:25 PM, an accidental fire occurred in the Eastern section of the Sub-Collector’s Office, Madanapalle. Sri B. Ramanaiah (Village Revenue Assistant), the night watchman, at about 11:25 PM, noticed flames and attempted to control the fire, but it spread uncontrollably. At 11:42 PM, he informed Smt. G. Thapaswini, Deputy Tahsildar of Nimmanapalle Mandal, informed the Camp Clerk of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Madanapalle. The Camp Clerk subsequently notified the Station Fire Officer, Madanapalle, and the complainant. Despite efforts to extinguish the flames and retrieve office files and computers, it was unsuccessful due to the intensity of the fire. The complainant then informed the Electricity Department, which promptly disconnected the power supply to prevent further spreading.
(ii) The complainant also notified the Collector & District Magistrate of Annamayya District, who called him by phone. By 12:45 AM, an additional fire tender arrived, and the fire was brought under control. Upon inspection, several items were found to be destroyed, including computer systems, monitors, a Xerox machine, printers, and scanners. Additionally, the following essential files were completely burned:
1. G. Gowtham Thej, Sr. Asst. – Alienation, Section 22-A, Dotted Lands, Assignment Freeholds
2. J. Yatheesha, Jr. Asst. – RTI Act, 2005
3. G. Shilpa, Sr. Asst. – Assignments, Assignment Appeals, Files related to Mudivedu Balancing Reservoir R&R
4. G. Aslam Basha, Election Dy. Tahsildar – Election Files, Files related to Horsley Hills Township Committee, Writ Petition, and his personal service record
(iii) The District Fire Officer confirmed that the fire was under control, with no injuries or fatalities. The investigating officer sent the burnt materials to CFSL, Hyderabad, for analysis to determine the cause, including potential electrical faults or flammable substances. Letters were also sent to the Collector of Annamayya District for information on land transactions related to freehold rights, dotted lands, and lands under Section 22A of the Registration Act.
(iv) Dr. V.B. Rajkamal, Additional Superintendent of Police (Admin), took over the investigation and recorded statements from LW1 to LW64. Based on the CDRs, searches led to the seizure of documents. During the investigation, it was found that T.Gowtham Tej forged the Revenue Divisional Officer's signature on Section 22-A files, resulting in criminal cases under Sections 465 and 468 IPC at Madanapalle I Town police station. The case was then handed to the Crime Investigation Department, with Sri D. Viswanath, DSP, C.I.D., Nellore, leading the investigation.
3. I have heard Sri O. Kailashanatha Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, representing the Respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel on sides reiterated their submissions on par with the contentions presented in the petition and complaint. Consequently, the contentions raised by learned counsel need not be reproduced.
5. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that:
(a) The petitioner was the Reven
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.