Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Telugumamilla Ranga Swamy, vs The State on 5 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE -FRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3544 OF 2021 Between: 1. Telugumamilla Ranga Swamy, S/o Venkatappa, Aged about 17 years, Telugu peta, Banaganapalli Town & Mandal, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. Boya Naga Raju, S/o Subbarayadu, Aged about 29 years, Kondapeta, Dr.No. 14- 239/12, Banumukkala, Banaganapalli Town & Mandal, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh. 3. N. Althaf Hushen, S/o Mahabub Miyya, Aged about 50 years, Dr.No.3-126, Khajivada, Banaganapalli Town & Mandal, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. Manipati Naveenu kumar, S/o M. Subbarayadu, Aged about 18 years, Dr.No.19- 48, Telugu peta, Banaganapalli Town & Mandal Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh 5. Penugonda Suresh, S/o P. Venkateswearlu, Aged about 26 years, Dr No.19- 48(2), Telugu Peta, Banaganapalli Town & Mandal Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh. 6. Todeti Venkateswalriu, S/o T. Govindu, Aged about 24 years, Dr.No 19-294-1 Telugu Peta, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh. 7, Mamilla Venkata Ramudu, S/o M.Kondanna, Aged about 55 years, Dr. No19-281 Telugu Peta, Banaganapalli Town & Mandal, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh. 8. Nasani Siva Kumar, S/o Venkata Ramudu, Aged about 26 years, Dr. No.19-349 Telugu Peta, Banaganapalli Town & Mandal, Kurnool! District, Andhra Pradesh. 9. Nagarjuna Manipati, S/o M. Subha Rayadu, Aged about 33 years, Kondapeta, Banaganapalli Town & Mandal, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh. 10.Jaya Chandra Degala, S/o D. :Pullana, Aged about 26 years, Kondapeia, Banaganapalli Town & Mandal, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh. ..Petitioner/Accused 10 to 19 AND The State, Station House Officer, Banganapalli P.S, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amravati. ...Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 438 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 enlarge the petitioners on Anticipatory bail in the event of their apprehension in connection with Crime No. 136 of 2021 of BanganaPalli P.S. IA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 438 r/w 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 grant interim bail, pending disposal of CRLP 3544 of 2021, on the file of the High Court. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Ghanta Sridhar, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Asst. Public Prosecutor for the Respondent, the Court made the following: ORDER:
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3544 OF 2021 ORDER:-
This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Cade of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") seeking pre-arrest bail to the petitioners/A10 to Al9 in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.136 of 2021 of Banaganapalli, Police Station, Kurnool registered for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 307, 147, 148, 341 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Cade, 1860 and Sections 3{i}(r) and 3{1}(s) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (for short the 'SC ST (POA) Act').
2, The case of the prosecution is that a report was lodged wherein it was alleged that the complainant who is working under Katasani Rami Reddy, MLA, Banganapalli Constituency since three years, received a phone call on 23.05.2021 from his friend who informed him that while he was passing through the house of Ex.MLA, B.C. Janardan Reddy to play cricket, his men stopped, questioned him as to why he was passing across that way and A2 beat him with a rod. On hearing the same, the complainant rushed to the spot. On seeing the complainant, Al abused him in the name of caste and A2 ie. Sreenu beat him on his head with an iron rod with an intention to kill the complainant due to which he sustained bleeding injury. It was also alleged in the complaint that A3 to AQ attacked the complainant with sticks and beat him indiscriminately due to which he sustained injuries on his head, hand and other parts of the body. Some people who were present there rescued the complainant and he was shifted to hospital, Basing on the said report the present crime is registered in which the petitioners herein are arrayed as AlO to A19.
3. Heard learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
4, Learned Senior Counsel submits that the petitioners have not committed the alleged offences and they are falsely implicated in the crime due to political rivalry prevailing in the village. He submits that the names of the petitioners do not find place either in the report lodged by the complainant or in the FIR. But subsequently they were arrayed as accused No.10 to 19. He submits that the offences under the provisions of 8c ST (POA) Act are not attracted to the petitioners as in the entire complaint there are no specific allegations made against the petitioners. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that accused whose names find place in the complaint and F.LR. were enlarged on regular bail and he filed a copy of the said order dated 21.06.2021 passed in CriL.M.P.No.77 of 2021 by the learned Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs and STs (POA) Act - cum- VI Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool. Therefore, he requests that the case of the petitioners may be considered for grant of pre-arrest bail, | aoe
5. Qn the other hand learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation and C.C.T.V. footage revealed that the petitioners were also present at the spot and basing on the statements given by the other accused with regard to the presence of the petitioners they are arrayed as A10 to A19 and the offences under the provisions of SC ST (POA) are attracted against the petitioners, Therefore, they are not entitled for pre-arrest bail in view of the bar under Section 18 of the SC & ST (POA) Act. Hence, he opposed the bail petition.
6. It is clear from a perusal of the complaint that specific allegations are leveled against the accused whose names are reflecting in the complaint as well as in the F.I.R. Even as per the C.C.T.V. footage and instructions of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, the presence of the petitioners at the spot is revealed but the allegation that the petitioners herein abused the complainant in his caste name is not revealed. As such there is no bar for entertaining this application. Further the involvement of the petitioners in the alleged crime is also not specified. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners.
7, Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioners/A10 to Al9 shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.136 of 2021 of Banaganapalli, Police Station, Kurnool on condition of executing self bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) each | with two sureties for a likesum each to the Satisfaction of the Station House Officer, Banaganapalli, Police Station, Kurnool.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall Stand closed.
Sd/- M.SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR NTRUE COPY}; A "
ia wt i ? a For ASSISTANT-REGISTRAR To,
--
The Special Judge for Trail cases under SCs and STs (POA) act, cum VI Adal. District & Sessions, Kurnool, The Station House Officer, BanaganaPaili Police Station, Kurnool! District.
One CC to Sri. Ghante Sridhar, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP [OUT] One spare copy.
Da A wr BERTON eee HIGH COURT LK,J DATED:05/07/2021 ORDER CRLP.No.3544 of 2021 ALLOWED 3 Da RAST TORE ARSE TIEN WRT snteaitat