Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Surampudi Durga, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 4 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 372 OF 2021 Between: Surampudi Durga, W/o Surampudi Raju, Aged about 38 years, R/o D.No. 53-3-13/21, Near RCM Church, Fourth Street, First Floor Christurajapuram, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ...Petitioner/Accused AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Public Prosecutor, High Court of at Amaravathi, Through Station House Officer, Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada City, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh. ... Respondent Petition under Section 439 (1) (b) Riw 482 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to relax the conditions imposed in Cri.M.P.No.8 of 2021 dated 20-01-2021 on the file of Court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge- cum-Spl. Judge for Trial of APPDFE Act Cases at Vijayawada, Krishna District in Crime No. 708 of 2020 of Machavaram P.S., Vijayawada City, Krishna District, dated 28-10-2020. 1A NO: 1 OF 2021 , Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to dispense with filing of certified copy in Cr.M.P.No.8 of 2021 dated 20.01.2021 on the file of Court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Spl. Judge for trail of APPDFE Act Cases at Vijayawada City Krishna District, dated 28-10-2020, pending disposal of CRLP 372 of 2021, on the file of the High Court. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Challa Ajay Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioner and of Public Prosecutor for the Respondent, the Court made the following. ORDER
HONOURABLE SMT. JUCTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Criminal Petition No.372 of 2021 ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 (1) (b) read with Section 482 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') seeking relaxation of the condition imposed in Crl.M.P.No.8 of 2021 vide order dated 20.01.2021 passed by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum- Judge, Family Court, Vijayawada FAC, Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for trial of APPDFE Act Cases at Vijayawada in Crime No.708 of 2020 of Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada City, Krishna District.
2. The petitioner filed Cri.M.P.No.8 of 2021 seeking regular bail and the learned Sessions Judge, on consideration of the material, granted bail to the petitioner on condition of the petitioner executing personal bond for Rs.50,00,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each, apart from some other conditions. Now, the petitioner filed the present petition seeking relaxation of the condition of executing personal bond for Rs.50,00,000/-
with two sureties.
3. Heard Sri Challa Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-
State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Sessions Judge, while granting bail to the petitioner, has imposed a condition of executing personal bond for Rs.50,00,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each, apart 2 LK, J CRLP.No.372 of 2021 from other conditions. He submits that imposition of such condition of executing personal bond for Rs.50,00,000/- is highly onerous and the petitioner is not in a position to comply with such condition and the same is literally denying the bail. In Support of his contention, he relied on a decision reported in Keshab Narayan Banerjee and another v. State of Bihar!, wherein it is held that imposition of condition of executing such Sum appears to be excessively onerous and it amounts to denial of bail.
5. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner has cheated number of innocent people to a tune of more than one crore, as such, the condition imposed by the court below is just and reasonable and the said condition May not be relaxed.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions of the learned counsel and in the light of the judgment relied on in Keshab Narayan Banerjee and another v. State of Bihar (stated Supra), this court prima facie of the view that imposition of condition of executing personal bond for Rs.50,00,000/- with two sureties is highly onerous and it amounts to denial of bail. In the circumstances, the condition of executing personal bond for Rs.50,00,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each needs to be modified to the extent of executing personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) with two sureties for a like sum each. é 'AIR 1985 SC 1666 To, N Wo Rw 3 LK, J CRLP.No.372 of 2021 Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the condition of executing personal bond for Rs.50,00,000/- is modified and the petitioner shall execute personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) with two sureties for a like sum each. However, the rest of the conditions imposed by the court below remained unaltered.
Sa/-E kame .
. SWaraR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITTRUE COPY// SECTIO Oo.
For ASSIS taw: FFICE Wee . The Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Spl. Judge for trail of APPDFE Act Cases at Vijayawada City, Krishna District.
The Station House Officer, Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada City, Krishna District.
One CC to Sri. Challa Ajay Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP [OUT] One spare copy.
HIGH COURT LK,J DATED:04/02/2021 ORDER CRLP.No.372 of 2021 DIRECTION