IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA, J.
The State through CBI - Petitioner
Versus
T. Gangi Reddy @ Yerra Gangi Reddy, S/o. Peda Gangi Reddy and Another. - Respondents
Criminal Petition No.2995 of 2023
Decided On : 28-04-2023
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 164, 174 - Cancellation of bail - Conspiracy and pre meditated plan resulted in death - Seeking cancellation of bail that was granted in favour of accused No.1 - Held, Their Lordships held that proving by test of balance of probabilities that accused has abused his liberty or that there is a reasonable apprehension that he will interfere with course of justice is all that is necessary for prosecution to do in order to succeed in an application for cancellation of bail - Court is of view that liberty granted to accused No.1 (respondent No.1 herein) has to be curtailed to enable CBI to proceed with investigation - Court has considered fact that accused No.1 (respondent No.1 herein) is enjoying liberty granted through default bail - Court has taken note of fact that CBI could not conclude investigation despite of lapse of considerable time from date of incident - Criminal Petition allowed.
ORDER :
1. This matter came up for consideration before this Court basing on the application initially filed before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi by the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as “the CBI” for brevity) seeking cancellation of bail that was granted in favour of accused No.1 (respondent No.1 herein) in RC.No.04(S)/2020/SC-III/New Delhi. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh which dealt with the matter through orders, dated 16.3.2022, exhibiting an opinion that there are no legal grounds to cancel the bail that was granted in favour of accused No.1 (respondent No.1 herein), dismissed the application, vide Criminal Petition No.788 of 2022.
2. CBI carried the matter in appeal to the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered judgment on 16.01.2023 in Criminal Appeal No.37 of 2023, remitting the matter back to the High Court for considering the application moved by the CBI afresh in accordance with law and on merits in the light of the observations made by it. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in pursuance of the earlier judgment and the order rendered by it transferring the case to C.B.I. Special Court, Hyderabad, ordered that the application moved for cancellation of bail, which was earlier filed before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi, be transferred to the High Court for the State of Telangana. The Hon’ble Supreme Court ordered this Court i.e., High Court for the State of Telangana to consider, decide and dispose of the application for cancellation of bail on merits and in the light of the observations made. Thus, the present case came up for consideration before this Court.
3. Heard Sri N.Nagendar and Sri Anil Talwar, learned Special Public Prosecutors for CBI. Also, heard Sri D.Seshadri Naidu, learned senior counsel, who argued on behalf of Sri C.Sharan Reddy, learned counsel on record for respondent No.1-accused No.1. Also heard, Sri L.Ravi Chander, learned senior counsel and Sri Posani Venkateswarlu, learned senior counsel, who argued on behalf of Ms. T.Swetcha, learned counsel on record for respondent No.2.
4. Perused the contents of entire material that is placed by the contesting parties and the contents of the case law relied upon.
5. The case of the CBI, as per the contents of charge sheet, in capsule, is that a larger conspiracy and pre meditated plan resulted in the death of Sri Y.S.Vivekananda Reddy (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased” for brevity), who was a prominent political person at the State of Andhra Pradesh. The deceased served as Member of Legislative Assembly, Member of Lok Sabha and as Minister in the Government of Andhra Pradesh for a considerable period. The deceased happens to be the brother of former Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh and uncle of the present Chief Minister of the same State.
6. The plan for assassination of the deceased was prepared in or around 10.02.2019 at the house of accused No.1, for cancellation of whose bail, the CBI is before this Court. The ex-driver of the deceased i.e., accused No.4-Shaik Dasthagiri, accused No.2-Y.Sunil Yadav and accused No.3-Gajjala Uma Shankar Reddy were part of the plan and conspiracy. All were having different reasons for boring grudge against the deceased. On the date on which all gathered, i.e., on 10.02.2019, accused No.1 (respondent No.1 herein) proposed for killing the deceased. On a query posed by accused No.4-Shaik Dasthagiri, accused No.1 (respondent No.1) said “You are not alone, we are all with you and we have support of very powerful persons”. Accused No.4-Shaik Dasthagiri enquired “who are those powerful persons.” On that, accused No.1 (respondent No.1 herein) replied that Y.S.Avinash Reddy, Y.S.Bhaskar Reddy, Y.S.Manohar Reddy and D.Siva Shankar Reddy are also involved in the plan and that D.Siva Shankar Reddy (who is arrayed as accused No.5 through a supplementary char
State (Delhi Administration) Vs. Sanjay Gandhi
Kanwar Singh Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan and another
Cancellation of bail – Interference or attempt to interfere with due course of investigation or administration of justice is one of prominent factors for cancellation of bail.
Point of Law : Right of the accused to claim bail on account of default committed by the prosecuting agency in completing the investigation within the time stipulated in the statute is a statutory ri....
Cancellation of Bail – Court while granting bail has not considered the nature and gravity of the accusations, severity of the punishment in the event of bail, likelihood of repetition of the offence....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to grant bail should be exercised judiciously, following well-established principles, and not in a mechanical or cryptic manner.
The main legal point established is that the grounds for granting and cancelling bail should consider the seriousness of the offence, nature of evidence, and likelihood of interference with justice.
(1) Default bail – Courts have power to cancel bail and to examine merits of case in a case where accused is released on default bail and released not on merits earlier.(2) Deeming fiction under Sect....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the misuse of bail and the legal principles governing the cancellation of bail.
The court has the authority to cancel bail if the order suffers from serious infirmities resulting in miscarriage of justice, and if the accused misuses their liberty, interferes with the investigati....
Superior court interferes with bail grant only if order arbitrary, perverse or ignores material like offence gravity; distinct from cancellation for supervening circumstances.
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.