SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Telangana) 816

HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OFTELANGANA, ATHYDERABAD
A. ABHISHEK REDDY, N. TUKARAMJI, JJ.
 
Battigari Shaker, S/o. Laxmaiah – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad – Respondent 
IA No. 1 of 2022 In CRLA No 766 of 2015 
Decided On : 19-12-2022 

Bail in serious offences requires consideration of the crime's gravity despite satisfactory prisoner conduct.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 302 and 379 - Application for bail pending appeal - The petitioner/appellant seeks enlargement on bail after completing over five years of imprisonment under a life sentence for serious offences. The court refers to precedent case law. (Paras 2, 4, 5)

(B) Bail - Guidelines - Court emphasizes that despite the satisfactory conduct of the petitioner, the seriousness of the offences committed and the nature of sentencing outweigh the considerations for bail. (Para 5)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner/appellant was convicted for murder and theft, receiving a life sentence in the trial court. He seeks bail based on time served and good behavior.

Findings of Court:
The court finds that the petitioner/appellant's case does not meet the criteria for bail as per established case law, given the serious nature of the offence.

Issues: The court addresses whether the conduct of the petitioner and time served warrant bail in light of the severity of the crimes.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that while the petitioner’s conduct is satisfactory, the gravity of the offence justifies the denial of bail, affirming that serious offences impose stricter scrutiny in bail decisions.

Result: Application for bail dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks bail after sentence (Para 1 , 4)
2. arguments for bail based on good behavior (Para 2 , 3)
3. court's reasoning against granting bail (Para 5)
4. conclusion to dismiss bail application (Para 6)

ORDER :

In the present application, the petitioner/appellant seeks to enlarge him on bail by suspending the sentence imposed on him in S.C.No.109 of 2015 vide judgment dated 08.07.2015, rendered by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Medak at Sanga Reddy, pending disposal of the appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant has stated that the petitioner/appellant has already completed more than five years of sentence of imprisonment, as such, the petitioner/appellant may tle enlarged on bail in view of the judgment of this Court in Batchu Rangarao v. The State of Andhra Pradesh {2016(3) ALr sOs (D.BXA.P)).

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has produced before this Court the nominal roll of the petitioner/appellant.

4. A perusal of the impugned judgment of the trial Court passed in S.C.No.109 of 2015 shows that the petitioner/appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 379 of INDIAN PENAL CODE and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.

5. Having regard to the above, though the conduct of the prisoner is satisfactory as per the nominal roll furnished by the learned Public Prosecutor and as the ease of the petitioner/appellant falls within the exceptions laid down in Batchu Rangarao's case(supra), we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner/appellant.

6. Accordingly, the present I.A. is dismissed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top