Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Talari Ramesh vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 6 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY QF JULY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE 7. ~ : co © PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CRL.P.No. 3472 of 2021 Between:- Talari Ramesh, S/o. Pullaiah, Loves Petitioner/Accused No.1. AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Amaravathi. veaee Respondent. Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the | circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No. 120 of 2021 on the file of the Proddatur Il] Town Police Station, Proddatur, YSR District in the event of his arrest. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri P.V.N. Kiran Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Public Prosecutor on behalf of respondent /State, the Court made the following ORDER :
-
THE HOWN'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CRIMINAL PETITION NO, 3472 OF 2021 ORDER:-
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Cade of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C."} seeking pre-arrest bail to the petitioner/accused No.1 in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.120 of 2021 of Proddatur HI Town Police Station, Proddatur, YSR Sadapa District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 326, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "I.P.C."}.
2. The case of the prosecution is that there is a land dispute between one Surya Narayana, who is the friend of de facto complainant and the petitioner herein, in that regard the petitioner approached the de facto complainant to settle the land dispute and the de facto complainant declined the said proposal, keeping the sare in mind the petitioner foisted a case under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities} Act, 1989 {for short "SC and ST Act") against the de facto complainant with a view to damage his job and grab the property from said Surya Narayana, while so on 24-05-2021 at about 11-00 A.M. when the de facto complainant while returning from the M.R.O. office, the petitioner and his followers obstructed him, abused him and threatened him with dire consequences and also beat him with stick. Basing on the complaint of de facto complainant, the present crime was registered. ~
--, ho
3. Heard Sri P.V.N. Kiran Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-
State.
4, Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the petitioner has filed a complaint against the de facto complainant which was registered as Crime No.i52 of 2021 on the file of Proddatur | Town Police Station and also filed another complaint which was registered as Crime No.116 of 2021 on the file of Proddatur HI Town Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 3 ) {r) (s} of the SC and ST Act, they are pending investigation. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as a counter blast to the said complaint, the present crime was registered and the petitioner is implicated in the present case, He also submits that even in the complaint also, it is stated that the petitioner has given a complaint against the de facto complainant. he further submits that there is a dispute with regard to the land an extent of Ac.1-80 cents in Sy.No.218/1 of Rameswaram village, Proddatur Mandal which belongs to the petitioner and an award was also passed in favour of the petitioner on 11-02-2017, the whole dispute is with regard to the land and hence his case may be considered for grant of pre-arrest bail,
5. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor submits that the injuries sustained by the de facto complainant are simple in nature and he also does not dispute the fact that other crimes are registered against the de facto complainant on the complaint given by the petitioner herein.
36. Taking into consideration the fact that the injuries sustained by the de facto complainant are simple in nature and as the petitioner has already filed complaints against the de facto complainant and the dispute is with regard to the land of an extent of Ac.1-80 cents in Sy.No.218/1 of Rameswaram village, Proddatur Mandal which belongs to the petitioner and an award was also passed in favour of the petitioner on 11-02-2017, this Court deems it appropriate to grant pre-arrest bail.
7, Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioner/accused No.1 shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.120 of 2021 of Proddatur Wl Town Police Station, Proddatur, YSR Kadapa District on a condition of executing self bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only} with two sureties for a likesum each to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer, Proddatur HI Town Police Station, YSR Kadapa District.
Sd/-M.Suryanadha Reddy /{TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR . A for SECTION SFFICER To . .
4.The Station House Officer, Proddatur {Il Town Police Station, YSR Kadapa District.
2.Two Cs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., at Amaravati(OUT)
3.One CC to Sri P.V.N. Kiran Kumar, Advocate(QPUC)
4.One spare copy.
TKK HIGH COURT iK.J _DT.06-07-2021.
ANTICIPATORY BAIL ORDER CRL.P.No. 3472 of 2021 CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED