Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Mudipalli Janaki Reddy, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 10 July, 2024
Author: K Sreenivasa Reddy
Bench: K Sreenivasa Reddy
IN THE HSH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVAT WEDNESDAY THE TENTH BAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY GRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4420 OF 2024 Selween: 1. Mudipalli Janaki Reddy, Sid MSudhaka Reddy, Aged about 23 years Diguvaramapuram Village, R.C.Puram Mandal, Tirupat District. (A3) é, Sanaiehgar Jayachandra Reddy, Sio 8 Venkata Reddy, Aged about 26 years, Diguvar famapuram Vil lage, RG. Puram Mandal, Tirupati Disin eh (Ad) ; ; 3. Podalakuru Kocdandam, S/o p. Venkatesulu Reddy, aged about 29 years, Diguvaramanuram Village, R.C Puram Mandal, Tirupati [Nstrict. (45) 4. Bokkisan Chiranieevi, Sfo- 8B. Murug @ Reddy, aged about 30 years, Diguvaramapuram Vilage, RC Puram Mandal, Tirupati District, (AS} 5. Dandu Pushpakanth Reddy: S/o. Oo. Ramurthy Reddy, Rio. D.Not-34, Diguvaramapuram Vilage, R.C.Puram Mandal, Tirupati District, (A?) 5. Gogula Kotalah @ Roti, Sfo G. .Nagesh, aged about 19 years, residing at Yarakamarama Nagar, Karakambadi Vilage, Renigunia Mandal Tirupati District, (A713) tou oes PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through S.H.0. SV. University PS Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP at Amaravathi, oe RESPONDENT Petition under Sections 437-439 of Cr.P.C, praying that in. the "aircumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds flecl in support of the Criminal Petition, the Hi igh Court may be pleased fo enlarge the PelifionernAccused Nos.3 to 7& 13 on ball in connection with FIR.No 7S/ene4 on the file of the SHO SVU Police Station, for punishable offences under 4? Sections 147, 148, 307, $32, 324; 427, 120B nw 149 of Indian Penal Cade, ae , The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and fhe grounds fled in support thereef and upen hearing the arguments of Ave VMR LEGAL, Advocate for the Petitioners and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR far the Respondent and the Court made the faficwing: APROMOZERENS IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA (a PRADESH ee AT AMARAVATI ile (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY .THE TENTH DAY OF JULY "SNIQ THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 47 20/024 (33271 Behveen: Mudinalli Janaki Reddy, and Others _.PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh _.RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitionerfaccused(S): 4.VMR LEGAL Counsel for the Respondanticomplainant: 4 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order: This Criminal Petition, under Sections 407 and 439 of Cr.P.c., has been fled by the ps atitionears herain/Ad to A? and ATS, seeking requiar ball, in Crime No.F5 of 2084 of SVU Campus, Tirupathi District. > A case has been registered against the petitioners herein &3 to AT and Ai? and other accused for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, S07, 232, 34, 497, 1208 read with 449 xf the indian Penal Cade, 1660 (for brevity TPC'). 3 'Brief facts af the case of prosecution are that, on 44,05 2024 at 3.00 PM af the premises of Sri Padmavathi Mahia University, Complainant, a Case nT ee eben (OOM LTO A LLU LEP % TMrupathi District was registe ry Tirupati, the ae facto SOMpIaINaNE went fo Sti Padmavathj Mahila University, Tirupati in his ear besring registration NoAPos ep 6888 along with his GUNMAN, driver vf Ranjith and his atiendant Saravana fo atiend the Sirong room inspection at ihe time of deposit of Eyag boxes and its Dreservation Procedure. AL thar Ema, wher he was about fo reach at a near distance fo the strong room, the followers of MLA viz, C. Bhaskar Reddy and hig SOn (Mohit Reddy, his followers betitioners herein; AS fo A? and AQ3 slong WHA his men with @ criminat COMSDIacy and commen inferdtion, armed with deadly weapans fe hammer, iron rods, beer hotties Qand cricket bails were alleged io have aiiacked tham by obstructing Als car. They were alleged to have damaged the car and attempted fo commit murder of oe fecfo complainant by hacking and beating him with deadly Weapons. The betivoners herein' AS to AT and ATl3 were alleged to have atacked him and Caused injuries to his left shoulder and caused dumb injures an HIS body and when Als GUNMAN came to his FE8cue, Al was alleged fo haye beaten him with @ dig hammer ang ted fo kil Aim 8nd caused grievous injury, Basing on the FEPOrE oF de feck in Crime No75 of 2094 of S¥u Carnpus, ered for the alleged offences arid investigated infe, .
3
4. Learned counsel for he petitioners herein/Ad to AY and AS contends that petitioners hereiAS to AP and At? were arrested on 18.05.2084 and since then, they are in judicial remand, Major nortion of Investigation has been completed except Hing ef charge sheet. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that in the present crime, Ai and A2 were enlarged on bail as per orders of this Court in CrP. No. 9900 of 2084, dated 01.07 2026.
2. Cin the contrary, fear ned Assistant Public Prosecutor Fay ntey contends that all the accused in a mob allacked Ihe de facto complainant. According io him, the police have to identity the assailants by watching the videograph, unless the Test identification Parade is conducted, itis difficull ta identify hem. He y further submis that along with de facto complainant, one oubhc a servant we. Dharani Kumar was also got injured.
&. Heard beth sides. Perused the record.
7. On the date of the incideni, the contesting candidale, who is the de fecfo complainant and another went to Si Padme svathi Mahila University, Tirugathi in fis car along with his gunman to atiend the strong room inspection at the time of depasit of EVM boxes and Hs preservation as per the schedule served to hin. The accused conspired together and with a common intention, armed with deadly weapons had damaged the car and attempted fo beat with rods and beer bottles. The petiioners herein' AS to A? and AV3 were alleged to have attacked the de fseio complainant and caused injury to his left shoulder and dumb injuries on his body paris, Or seeing the same, the gunman of the de facto complainant had come to his rescue. I is alleged that the petitioners herein' AS ta AY and ATS attacked him and caused grievous Injuries to him, Af that point of time, the gunman has opened fire and the assailants ran away by leaving their vehicles.
8. TRis Court has perused the Wound Certificate of public sérvant wie. M.Dharani Kumar and ae facto complainant vfs. Pullvarthi Venkata Muni Prasad. insofar as the Wound Certificate in respect of de facio complainant wiz. Pullivarthi Venkata Muni Prasad, the Doctor opined that the injury Nos.1, 2, 3, 4 and § are simple In nature and no abnormality has been found on the injures received by him.
g, in respect of injured vz. MLDharani Kurnar, on Radiolngical examination, two injuries were found ie. (1) the laceration injury of 2x 1x 0.8 ems near jet eyebrow, and (2) pain and awetling of right ring finger, On Radislogical Atay opinian, the Doctor found thal fracture dislocation of proximal interphalangeal joint and base of middie phalanx of ring finger. The Doctor opined thaf the injury Noa.(t) near left eyebrow is simple in nature and injury Ne(3) pain 2 as and swelling fo fight fing finger appears fo be grievous im nature. At fhe same fime, there is no dianule wilh te gard io the fact that both injured were discharged from {he hospital. The patifioners harain? AQ io A? and A1Q were arrested on 16.05.2084 and since then, they are in judicial remand
49. Learmed Assistant Public Prosecutor siranuously contends that at this stage, ball application of the petitioners herein' AS to Ay and Ata cannot be considered, for the reason thal, Test identification Parade has fo be conducted. According to him, since the accused and other persons In the mob were 3 fieged to have atfacked the de fscfo complainant, unless and unl the Yest identification Parade is conducted, the accused cannot be idenitied.
44. ff such is the case, this Courl is of ihe opinion that for the fast 45 days the polices would have not done the samme, bul quile surprisingly, without there baing any identification of the accu sed, petitioners herein' Ad io Ay and A1S have been languishing in jal x identify the other accusen, # is unheard that for the said curpose, the petiioners werain' AS to AF and AS should be detained in jai.
42 Learned counsel for the oe faofo commainant conte seis that ere is a threat to the He of de facto comple ainant and another. He & relied upon a decision jn Kalyan Chandra Sarka Vs. Rajesh Ranian Alies Pappu Yadav and another', wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court made an observation in paragraph No. 14, which goes fo show that iis Cour jn Specitc ferns feild that the condition laid dawn under Seotion 437 (7) {9 18 sine qua non for granting bail Gven under Section 439 CrP." It is further observed that "toe High Court fas given the perod of incarceration already undergone by the accused and fhe unlikelihood of trial COMO jf the near future as Grounds sufficient fo enlarge the accused on Ball, in spite of the faci that the accused stands charged of fey f : an slosh fie % 7 He imprisonment ar even death penaliy z offences punishable wit There is no dispute with regard to the proposition of law laid down by the Han'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid decision.
13. However, on this aspect, ft is pertinent to refer io the principle Igid down in the Judgment in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of investigation'. Merely because, the other accused in the mob are to he identified, the petitioners herein/A3 to Af and Ai3 need not be detained in the prison further. Since video of entire incident is available, there is no reason, why the other assailants could Ak be identified HH today. Since, the petitioners herein' A3 to AT and Al3 are languishing in jail for 2 (2004) 7 Supreme Court Qasag 678.
" {2022} 10 SEO 84 i more than 45 days, this Court js of the opinion that i is a case fo grant bal fo the petitioners hereing AS to AY and ATS. The petitioners hergin' AS to AP and Ai3 are hermanent residents, having fixed abode. Thare is no fi ght risk,
14. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined fo grant ball to the petitioners herein' AS to A? and ATS, an the fo follwing conditions:
a The petifioners herein' AS f A? and SS ATS shall be released an bal on their execuiing 3 PS teed a a Al Fo a & % in ete & a os) rg Me woes "ey Ee personal bond for Re 25, thousand only} each with hwo surefies for a Hke sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial jase, Tirupathi up On release, the petifoners hereinf Ag fo Af and Al3 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned ance ina week Le. on every Friday between 10.00 am. and o1.00 Ou. HA filing of the charge sheet.
15. Accareingly, the Criminat H Pent fon is allowed, SONG SRINIVAS REO OSSISTANT BES ISTRAR §e © ro. For ASSISTANT REGIS far The Judicial Firs (lags Mealstrate. Tin upal, The X Additic nal D Gisinot & Session $ Judge, Firupat The Superin mendent, Kadana Ce antral Jal Radapa District The SUH OO soy University Palice Statis , Tirupati Gre OC ts 'Mis §. VMIR LEGAL Advai Mais 2 (OPUC) Two OCs ts Public Prosecutor, Nigh Court : of AP pOUTT Qne spare @ copy MODE OM Be 65 Pd ot ay how . LOCO Eber de gy LEE GC Oo bse Ll '2 % SS wade witty verceet verre, % 5 oo £6 3 g dhe tf a Oftite 2 Z Ai ypreee. if 4 Hi ARS TOOF/2024 » x HIGH COURT BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.4420 of 3034 Fe ALLOWED SRK,J DATED