Telangana High Court
The State Of Telangana vs Shaik Salman on 24 January, 2022
Author: Lalitha Kanneganti
Bench: Lalitha Kanneganti
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5676 of 2021
O R D E R:
This Criminal Petition, under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is filed by the petitioner-State seeking to cancel the bail granted to respondents/A-14 & A-23 vide order dated 05.07.2021 in Crl.M.P.No.281 of 2021 on the file of VII Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC), Nirmal in connection with Crime No.36 of 2021 of Bhainsa Town Police Station.
2. Heard learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the petitioner-State and Sri M.A.K. Mukheed, learned counsel for the respondents.
3. Learned Assistant Prosecutor submits that the respondents were involved in other 11 criminal cases on the file of Bhainsa Police Station registered for similar offences. It is further stated that in Bhainsa Town, there is horrible situation and the general public are under fear due to violent activities of communal elements as several accused were repeatedly committing the offences by damaging the properties including essential commodities/food grains and also insulting the women with evil intention. He submits that the Court below failed to consider the fact that if the respondents are released on bail, there is an imminent danger to the lives and properties of the victims.
2
4. Learned counsel for respondents submits that mandatory bail was granted to the respondents after completion of 60 days and they were already released on bail and that since more than six months from the date of their release, there is no complaint against them for violation of any condition imposed by the Court below. Thus, he prays to dismiss the criminal petition.
5. In reply, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that as the respondents were already released on bail, instead of cancellation of bail, some stringent conditions may be imposed against them in order to secure their presence for the purpose of fair investigation.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and in the light of the submission made by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, it would be appropriate to modify the conditions imposed by the Court below, except condition (a) of paragraph No.8 of the impugned order, and impose the following conditions, instead of conditions (b) to (d) of paragraph No.8 of the impugned order, on the respondents, as imposed earlier by this Court while granting bail to the accused in similar offences.
(i) That the respondents/A-14 & A-23 shall appear before the Station House Officer, Adilabad I Town Police Station, on every Friday between 09.00 am and 05.00 pm till completion of investigation and filing of final report;
(ii) That the respondents/A-14 & A-23 shall not indulge in similar type of offences in future and if it is found that they are indulged in similar type of offences in future, 3 liberty granted to them shall automatically stand cancelled and they would be taken into custody forthwith without issuing any notice or warrant;
(iii) That the respondents/A-14 & A-23 shall not interfere with the investigation, intimidate or induce the prosecution witnesses and shall cooperate with the investigating agency;
(iv) That the respondents/A-14 & A-23 shall not move within 20 km radius of the place of occurrence;
(v) That the respondents/A-14 & A-23 shall not misuse the liberty granted to them; and
(vi) That the respondents/A-14 & A-23 shall appear before the Court concerned personally on each date of hearing till conclusion of trial.
7. With the aforesaid modification, the Criminal Petition is disposed of As a sequel all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.
___________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 24th January, 2022 PVD 4 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CRIMINAL PETITION No.5676 of 2021 24.01.2022 PVD