IMPORTANT POINT
Bail application – In a case arising out of different transactions and different occurrence, arrest of accused in one case cannot be considered as formal arrest in other cases.

ORDER

Heard Mr. Posani Venkateswarlu, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Posani Akash, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent-State. Perused the material available on record.

2. Accused No.1 in Crime No.79 of 2023 on the file of Mudiveedu Police Station, Annamayya District, filed this petition, under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C., for grant of regular bail in connection with the said crime.

3. The aforesaid crime has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 147, 148, 153, 307, 115, 109, 323, 324 and 506 read with 149 I.P.C., on the basis of the report dated 08.08.2023 lodged by one D.R. Umapathi Reddy, Chairman of Market Committee, Kurabalakota Mandal. The contents of his report, in brief, are as under:

On 04.08.2023, the de facto complainant, who is a party worker of YSRC Party, along with other party workers of YSRC Party and villagers, was waiting at three-road junction, Angallu, by setting up a tent and wearing black scarves, with the intention of giving a representation against obtaining of stay orders with regard to Pitchalavandlapalle Project to the former Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, Sri Nara Chandra Babu Naidu (accused No.1), who was about to travel along that way on that day on account of his visit to Chittoor District from Ananthapuramu. At about 2.30 p.m. on that day, the convoy of accused No.1 reached the three-road junction of Angallu village and at that time, accused No.1, upon seeing the tent set up by the de facto complainant and others and upon identifying them as YSRCP leaders, pointed his finger towards them and by referring to them, stated as “thamaashaaga vundha? Aa naa kodukulanu tharamandira, veseyandira vaallani” (Is it fun? chase away these fellows, do away with them). Upon hearing the same, accused Nos.2 to 13 present in his vehicle instigated their followers, accused Nos.14 to 20, and other TDP workers, by way of certain gestures and words, to make an attack on the de facto complainant and other YSRC party workers, upon which they formed into an unlawful assembly and made an attack on the de facto complainant and others, with deadly weapons i.e., stones, sickles, bricks, sticks and iron rods, carried by them. On realizing that the said TDP persons were prepared to kill them, the de facto complainant party tried to run away, but the accused party threw stones at them and caused bleeding injuries and some of the police officials, who came to control the situation, were also injured. While attributing specific overt acts to certain accused persons, it is alleged that the manner in which accused No.1 and other leaders in the vehicle provoked the attack would indicate that all of them conspired together, brought deadly weapons with an intention to kill those who intended to give representation, attacked them and attempted to kill them.

4. At the outset, it is to be noted that admittedly, the petitioner has not yet been arrested in the present crime. He has been arrested in connection with Crime No.29 of 2021 of CID Police Station, A.P., Mangalagiri, in the intervening night of 08/09.09.2023 and upon production before the Court of the III Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Vijayawada, he has been remanded to judicial custody on 10.09.2023. While so, contending that since the petitioner has been in judicial custody in Crime No.29 of 2021 of CID Police Station, he cannot move an application seeking anticipatory bail, under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in the present crime, and that the judicial custody of the petitioner in respect of Crime No.29 of 2021 of CID Police Station, should be treated as deemed judicial custody in the present crime also and he should be granted regular bail in the present crime, this petition under Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed.

5. So far as the maintainability of this petition under Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C. is concerned, it is