Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
HARINATH N.
Pesala Sivashankar Reddy – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Key Points: - The case held that organized crime allegations require more than one prior charge sheet filed within the preceding ten years for invocation of Section 111(2)(b) BNS (!) (!) - The court agreed with Kerala High Court’s position that Section 111 can be invoked only if more than one charge sheet has been filed in the preceding ten years and taken cognizance by a court (!) - The petition was allowed; bail granted with conditions: personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, and cooperation with investigation (!) (!) - The petition involved alleged defamatory social media posting about public officials and alleged organized crime under BNS and offenses under IT Act 67 (!) (!) - The court noted absence of requisite prior charge sheets led to non-applicability of organized crime allegations under Section 111(2)(b) BNS (!) - The document cites statutory sections and judicial precedents on organized crime definitions and consequences under BNS (!) (!) (!) - The court’s reasoning aligns with prior judicial standards requiring multiple prior charge sheets for invocation of organized crime provisions (!) (!)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accusation details and intent to defame. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments on applicability of section 111. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. provisions and definitions of organized crime. (Para 6 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. insufficient prior charges to invoke section 111. (Para 7 , 11) |
| 5. determining obscenity under section 67 it act. (Para 12 , 14) |
| 6. granting bail and conditions. (Para 15 , 16) |
ORDER :
1. The petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.1 in Crime No.411 of 2024 at Kankipadu Police Station, Krishna District, registered under Sections 192 , 196, 336(4), 340(2), 353(2), 61(2), 111(2)(b) B.N.S, 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000-2008.
2. It is alleged that the de facto complainant noticed a posting on the social media platform Facebook on 08.11.2024 posted by the petitioner. The posting related to defamatory content concerning the Deputy Chief Minister and the Chief Minister of the State, with the intention to defame both. The petitioner is alleged to have used abusive language in the said posting. The posting is further alleged to have caused political disturbance that could lead to escalated violence. A complaint was lodged by the de facto complainant.
3. The learned counsel for the peti
The court established that organized crime allegations require multiple prior charge sheets within ten years for statutory applicability, aligning with previous judicial standards.
The court denied bail based on the petitioner's prior criminal history and the serious nature of allegations under organized crime provisions.
The absence of legally admissible evidence against the accused, particularly regarding organized crime, is crucial for granting bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
To classify offences under organised crime, there must be admissible evidence of unlawful activity, which the petitioners lacked, justifying the granting of pre-arrest 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
