Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
G Harish Naidu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 20 January, 2021
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6226 OF 2020 Between: G Harish Naidu, S/o G.S. Rajamanikyam Naidu, Aged about 34 years, R/o H.No. 4- 113, NTR Colony, Puttur Town, Chittoor District. Petitioner/Accused AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi. Through S.H.O., Nagari Urban P.S., Respondent/De-facto Complainant Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the memo of grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in crime no. 435/2020 of Nagari Urban PS, Chittoor District. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and memo of grounds filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri B Chandra Shekhar, Advocate for the Petitioner, and of Public Prosecutor for Respondent, the Court made the following ORDER
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CRIMINAL PETITION No.6226 of 2020 ORDER:
This petition is filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C") seeking pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/Accused in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.435 of 2020 on the file of Nagari Urban Police Station, Chittoor District, wherein the petitioner jis alleged to have committed the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "IPC") and Section 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "SC ST Act").
2. A complaint dated 19.09.2020 was lodged stating that the accused and his father owns an extent of Ac.0.24 cents and Ac.0.34% cents of land and they have entered into an agreement of sale with the defacto complainant and on 10.09.2020 a sale deed was executed in respect of Ac.0.24 cents and so far as Ac.0.341%4 cents of land is concerned, it is stated that some litigation is pending, as such they are not in a position to execute the sale deed. When the defacto complainant questioned the Same, he Started abusing in the name of his caste. Basing on the said complaint, the present crime was registered,
3. Heard Sri B.Chandra Sekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would Submit that it is purely a civil transaction between the parties and the complaint reveals that the State President of Jai Bheem Sena has lodged the complaint, which is contrary to Section 154 of Cr.P.C. He submits that only to pressurize the petitioner, the present complaint is given and it is nowhere stated in the complaint that the said abuse in the name of caste is in the public view. He further submits that though the alleged incident took place on 10.09.2020, the complaint was given on 19.09.2020 and there is no explanation for the said delay.
5. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is in progress and so far five witnesses were examined and none of them have stated anything with regard to abusing in the name of caste. He submits that the witnesses stated that defacto complainant informed them that the petitioner abused him in the name of his caste. He submits that as per the allegations in the complaint, there are specific overt acts against the petitioner and in view of the bar under Section 18 of SC ST Act the petition for grant of pre-arrest bail is not maintainable.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and on perusal of the complaint, prima facie, all the allegations in the complaint are purely civil in nature and except stating that the petitioner abused in the name of caste, it is nowhere stated that the said abuse is in the public view to attract the offences under SC ST Act. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
7. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed and the petitioner/Accused shall be enlarged on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.435 of 2020 on the file of Nagari Urban Police Station, Chittoor District, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties each for a likesum to the satisfaction of Station House Officer, Nagari Urban Police Station, Chittoor District.
As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.
Sd/-K.JaganMohan DEPUTY REGISTRAR TRUE COPYIT = SECTION OFFICER ro rban Police Station, Chittoor District.
Court of A.P., at Amaravati (OUT) 4 The Station House Officer, Nagari U ic Prosecutor, High
2. Two CCs to Public
3. One CC to SriB. Chandra Shekhar, Advocate (OPUC)
4. One spare copy / sSkm HIGH COURT LK, J DATED:20/01/2021 ORDER CRLP.No.6226 of 2020 PALS f MOD DIRECTION tas; Side PAR ne