Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Shaik Umar Farooqfaruk vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 12 July, 2022
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4539 OF 2022
ORDER:-
This petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") is filed by the petitioners/A4, A10, A14, A26, A32, A29, A36, A34 and A37 seeking anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.226 of 2018 of Tadipatri Rural Police Station, Ananthapur District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 506, 307 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short „SC & ST (POA) Act‟).
2. The case of the prosecution is that a report was lodged alleging that on 15.09.2018 some incident took place near Prabhodananda Swamy Ashram situated at Chinna Polamada village and on 16.09.2018 at about 12:00 noon when the complainant was standing on the back side of the main gate of Ashram, A1 and some others who are residing adjacent to said Ashram, came there shouting „Lambadi bastards how dare you stand against JC brothers and threatened to beat him with rods with an intention to kill him. But the complainant managed to escape from the spot. Basing on the said complaint, the present crime is registered.
2
3. Heard Sri R. Harish Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Soora Venkata Sainath, learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent-state. Police informed the complainant on 08.07.2022 about filing of bail application and Special Assistant Public Prosecutor filed copy of notice.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are falsely implicated in the crime taking advantage of mentioning of the word „others‟ in the complaint. He submits that petitioners are arrayed as accused after consultations and confabulations by the complainant and there is no iota of material in respect of essential ingredients. He submits that even if the allegations are assumed to be true, none of the alleged offences attract to the petitioners herein and there are no specific overt acts attributed against the petitioners. He submits that there is delay in preferring the complaint and no plausible reason is given for the delay in preferring the complaint. He submits other accused who stand on similar footing were granted bail. Hence, he prays to grant bail.
5. On the other hand, learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the bail petition on the ground that investigation is pending.
6. A perusal of the complaint indicates that the alleged incident took place on 16.09.2018 and the complaint was lodged on 08.10.2018 without giving any reasons for such delay and admittedly the names of petitioners are not mentioned in the 3 complaint. Further the record shows that some of the accused who stand on similar footing were granted bail.
7. In view of the above, as the crime is of the year, 2018 and in view the principle of parity, as some of the accused who stand on similar footing were granted bail, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.
12. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed Petitioners/ A4, A10, A14, A26, A32, A29, A36, A34 and A37 shall be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No. 226 of 2018 of Tadipatri Rural Police Station, Ananthapur District on furnishing 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, Tadipatri Rural Police Station, Ananthapur District.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date :12.07.2022 IKN 4 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Allowed CRIMINAL PETITION No.4539 OF 2022 12.07.2022 IKN