Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Gali Jayapal, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 16 December, 2020

       THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

                CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5580 OF 2020
ORDER:

-

This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") to enlarge the petitioner/A-1 on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.373 of 2020 of V.Satram Police Station of SPSR Nellore District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120B and 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The case of the prosecution is that a complaint was lodged by the de facto complainant stating that as per the directions of the Project Director, DRDA on 21.10.2020 the de facto complainant inspected Paddy Purchase Center (PPC) of Nidiguntapalem to verify the trip sheets submitted by the petitioner herein and he submitted report on 23.10.2020. As per the same, the petitioner herein has submitted the land documents of an extent of Ac.18.50 cents of Eedagali Village and along with that he has also given Photostat copies of Aadhar card and Bank pass book. It is stated that the petitioner has cheated 11 farmers without cultivating the land. He has procured paddy from the farmers for lesser amount and sold the same to PPOs and thereby cheated the Government. Basing on that the above crime is registered.

3. Heard Sri Venkateswarlu Posani, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/A-1 submits that in the remand report it is clearly mentioned that on 19.10.2020 a news item is published in the Andhra Jyothi Telugu daily that some malpractices have taken place in issuing truck sheets to the petitioner herein in PPC Nidiguntapalem. Later on 21.10.2020 the petitioner approached district officials and submitted representations that he never approached PPC Nidiguntapalem and never obtained any truck sheets and requested them to enquire into the issue. Accordingly, the Project Director, DRDA instructed to enquire into the issue and submit enquiry report as early as possible. It is submitted that the petitioner is falsely implicated in the case for the reasons best known to them.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed a memo dated 31.10.2020 which was addressed to the Project Director, DRDA, Nellore by the Joint Collector wherein it is stated that the petitioner herein has approached the authority and informed that he cultivated the paddy by taking Ac.18 of land on lease and needed a certificate of confirmation and he has forced the VRO to issue the certificate, without producing the documents of the lands on the grounds that he was drying up paddy on the roads and would get the same damaged, if the certificate is not issued to him immediately. He has stated that on humanitarian grounds he has issued the certificate to the petitioner herein. Further enquiry reveals that the petitioner has produced the certificate obtained from the VRO, Aadhar card and bank passbook pertaining to him and land documents relating to several other persons indicating that he must have cultivated paddy in the lands taken on lease. 3 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the other accused were already arrested and remanded to judicial custody. Though they have not credited the amount to the petitioner's bank account, Rs.8.40 lakhs has been sanctioned. He further submits that the investigation is pending and only two witnesses were examined.

6. Taking into consideration the proceedings dated 31.10.2020 prima facie it appears that there are serious allegations against the petitioner and the investigation is pending. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant pre arrest bail to the petitioner. However, as the punishment for the alleged offences is below seven years, the Police shall follow the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar1 scrupulously. Any deviation in this regard will be viewed seriously.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

___________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J Date :16.12.2020 KA 1 (2014) 8 SCC 273 4 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI (Disposed of) CRIMINAL PETITION No.5580 of 2020 Dated 16.12.2020 KA