Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Vanaja Sankararao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 8 May, 2023
\.
lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARA
MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY
l1^/O THOUSAND AND ll^/ENTY THREE
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE DuPPALA VENKATA RAMANA
lANo.1 OF2023
lN
CRLA NO.-318 OF 2018
Between :
vanaja sankararao, s/o. chI'nnamnaidu, Aged 48 years, R/o. Thallaburidi
Village, parvatl'puram Mandal, viziangaram District
.,.Petitioner/Accused
AND
The State ofAndhra pradesh, Rep., by public prosecutor, High Court of
Judicature at Amaravathi.
...Respondent/Respondent
't3±
petition under sect,Ion 389(1 ) of Cr.P.C praying that in the cI'rCumStanCeS Stated
in the petI'tl'On, the Hl'gh Court may be pleased to suspend the executI'On Of the
sentence, judgement passed on 26th, September, 2017, in S.C no.121 of 2016 on
the fl'le of " Additional sessl'ons Judge, parvatipuram and release the petitI'Oner On
bail, pending disposal of CRLA No. 318 of 2018, on the file of the Hl'gh Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and upon hearing
the arguments of srl' G. Vijaya saradhi, Advocate for the Appellant and of public
prosecutor for Respondent, the court made following
ORDER:
lfThis is an application, riled under section 389(1) of the code of Criminal procedure, seeking bail.
Main criminal Appeal came to be preferred by the petitioner- accused against the judgment dated 26.09.2O17, passed by the court of the learned II Additional sessions Judge at parvatipuram, in sessions case No.121 of 2O16. By way of the said judgment, the learned sessions uudge convicted the accused-petitioner herein for the offence punishable under sections 3O2 I.P.a., and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.2,OOO, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.
In this application, the petitioner is seeking bail by placing reliance on the judgment of the composite High Court ofAndhra Pradesh in the Case o£ Batchu Rangarao and ore., Vs., State of Andhra Pradesh reported in [2016(3) ALT (Criminal) 5O5 (AP)I. In the said judgment, the Court laid down the following guidelines, while considering the bail applications of the present nature:
T(1)_ A person who is corwicted for tire and whose appeal is pending before this Court is erteitled to apply for ball cLfter he has undergone a mlndm:um of five gears imprisonlneut fouOwing his COrtviCtiOn;
(2) Grant of bail in favour of persons ficriting in (1) supra shall be subifect to his good conduct in the jctit, as reported bg the respective 'ctil Superiutendertts ;
(3) In the fouowing categories of cases, the convicts w€u nat be e"±ifled tp be relecrsed on bail, despite their satisfying the criteria in (1) and (2) supra:
The o«ences retaking t9 _rape COuPled with m:urder of rr,lnOr Children daeoitg, mur_4er for gain, kidnapping for ransorrL, k:ming of the Pubtie servcmts, €hietsFtsoffinces failing under -the Nc[fionc\i Seclndky -Act drnd the o«ences perictining to narcotic drags.
(4) While grariting bat1> the two fiotlowing condiflons apart fro,n usual conditions hca,e to be €mposed9 via.9 (1) the appeuaats on bail must be present before the Court at the time of hearing of the criminal Appeals; and (2) they roast report in the respecti1,e Police Stations once €n a rT,Omth dirring the bail period.a' Instructions furnished by the jail superintendent are placed on record by the learned Public Prosecutor. According to the said instructions, the conduct of the petitioner is satisfactory and he has completed more than five years of actual sentence. It is not the case of the prosecution that the instant case falls under the exceptions as mentioned in the aforesaid decision.
For the aforesaid reasons, this petition is allowed, directing enlargement of the petitioner on bail in s.c.No.121 of 2016 on the rile of the Court of the learned II Additional Sessions Judge at Parvatipuram, subject to the petitioner furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the Court of the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Parvatipuram. It is made clear that the petitioner shall attend before the said court on one day in the first week of every month, pending appeal and if the same is not adhered to, the same be brought to the notice of this court for passing necessary order for cancellation of bail. It is further made clear that at the time of hearing the appeal, the petitioner shall be present before this court.'' Sd/-G. SR!NIVAS REDDY ASS]STAN EG !rjT'RAR //TRUE COPY// SECT-iON TJFFICER Tol
1. The ll Additional Sessions Judge, Parvatipuram, Vizianagaram District.
2. The Additional JudI'Cial Magistrate of First class, Parvatipuram, Vizianagaram District.
3. The Superintendent, central Prison, Visakhapatnam.
4. One CC to Sri. G Vijaya Saradhi, Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two cos to Public Pro§ecu{or, High Court ofAP [OUT]
6. Two spare copies.
MSB HIGH COURT AVSS,J & DVR,J DATED:08/05/2023 BAIL ORDER lA NO.1 OF 2023 IN CRLA.No.318 of 2018 ALLOWED i.i i. =--
gap+5=R`
-8MAV aun