IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
G. RADHA RANI, J.
Guduru Yugender Reddy - Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana and Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Petition No. 1547 of 2024
Decided On : 06-03-2024
ORDER :
(G. Radha Rani, J.)
1. This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-A1 under Sections 437 and 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure to enlarge him on bail in S.C. No. 5 of 2021 on the file of IX Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar (Crime No. 592 of 2020 of PS Gachibowli, Cyberabad), registered for the offences under Sections 120-B(1), 302, 364, 379, 448, 449, 341, 342, 352, 323 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. This is a case of honor killing, wherein it was alleged that A2, the father of de-facto complainant (LW.1) conspired to commit murder of his son-in-law who belonged to another caste, who married his daughter against his will and wish. A1 was alleged to be the brother-in-law of A2 and planned along with A2 and A3, the parents of the de-facto complainant and his other relatives A8, A9, A10 and A12 to A17 to commit the offence and hired the assassins A5 to A7 to execute the plan. They failed in their attempts twice.
3. The case of the prosecution as per the charge sheet filed by the Police was that in their third attempt on 24.09.2020, A1 started from the residence of A2 and A3 in his white color Maruthi Swift car bearing No. TS-08-ET-3031 to TNGO Colony where the de-facto complainant and her husband, the newly married young couple were residing in a rented house and asked A5 to A7 to come to TNGO Colony and wait in between the TNGO Colony and Gopanpally "X" Roads till they bring the deceased to the above place. A7, A8 and A9 went to the TNGO Colony in a white color I-20 car bearing No. TS-07-EV-1449. A12 to A16 went in a red color Maruthi Breeza car bearing No. TS-15-EX-9781. A2 and A10 went to TNGO Colony by motorcycle Honda Shine bearing No. AP-28-DF-1449. A2 dropped A10 at TNGO Colony at a distance and came back to his house at Lingampally and was co-ordinating with the other accused for the successful execution of the plan. After reaching the rental house of the deceased and LW.1 at TNGO Colony, the accused A8 to A10 and A12 to A16 entered into the house and asked them to come along with them to negotiate with the parents of LW.1 i.e. A2 and A3 for discussing about their marriage. LW.1 and the deceased did not agree suspecting some foul play and refused to go along with them. After prolonged persuasion, the accused felt that they would not come voluntarily, as such, dragged the deceased and LW.1 from the house and made them to sit in the I-20 car. A17 drove the said car in which A9 sat in the front seat, whereas A8 sat beside LW.1 and the deceased in the rear seat. The remaining accused A10 to A16 went by red color Breeza car following I-20 car. The accused A1 also followed I-20 car and Breeza car and while going towards Gopanpally "X" Roads picked up A5, A6 and A7 before Gopanpally "X" Roads en-route. The deceased made a call to his father intimating about his abduction. Upon that, LWs.2 and 3, the parents of the deceased started to TNGO Colony to know about abduction. The deceased also made a call to LW.4 and asked her to lock their house since they were being taken by the accused. On which, LW.4 went and locked the house of LW.1 and the deceased. When the I-20 car reached Gopanpally "X" Roads, it took left turn towards Outer Ring Road (ORR) instead of right turn i.e. towards Lingampally. As such, LW.1 and the deceased got suspicion and got down from the I-20 car and made efforts to escape by getting into an Auto with the help of LW.8, who was present on the roadside. The accused A5, A6 and A9 caught hold the deceased and dragged him into A1's white Maruthi Swift car bearing No. TS-08-ET-3031 and A1, A5 to A7 took him towards ORR. In the meantime, the accused A10 contacted A2 by phone and informed about the deceased being abducted and taken in the white Swift car and proceeded to ORR side and that LW.1 was resisting to accompany the remaining accused present there to Lingampally. A2 instructed LW.10 to push LW.1 into the car and get her to Lingampall
Shakthi Vahini v. Union of India
Rajesh Ranjan Yadav v. Central Bureau of Investigation through its Director
The court emphasized that in serious offenses like honor killing, the potential threat to witnesses and the severity of the crime outweigh the accused's right to bail.
Bail may be granted even in serious offences if the accused's fair trial rights are violated, and no compelling reason for continued incarceration exists.
The court held that bail cannot be granted based solely on parity with co-accused when the circumstances of the accused differ significantly, especially in serious crimes.
Communications between a client and an advocate are not privileged under Section 129 of the Indian Evidence Act when the purpose of the communication is to further a crime.
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....
The court emphasized that serious crimes with premeditated actions and potential threats to witnesses warrant denial of bail, especially when no change in circumstances is presented.
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....
The decision emphasized the importance of considering the nature of the offence, severity of the punishment, and the likelihood of the accused interfering with the process of justice when deciding on....
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.