Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Sri Nannapaneni Chalapathi Rao vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 13 November, 2024
.,.
[3365]
I/
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE DR V R K KRUPA SAGAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5652 OF 2024
Betwee n :
Sri Nannapaneni Chalapathi Rao, S/o Venkateswara Rao, aged 54 years D.
No. 2-6, Rangaiah Apparaopet, Bapulapadu Mandal, Ramannagudem,
Krishna District.
Petitioner/Accused No.15
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court
of A.P., Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. The State-I SHO, L & O, Gannavaram Police Stat'lon.
Respondent/Comp[ainant
Petition under Section 438-of Cr.P.C, (482 of BNSS), praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition,
the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to enlarge the
petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the case in
cr.No.137 of 2023 on the file of the SHO, Gannavaram P.S., Krishna Distr'lct,
which was registered for the alleged offences punishable under sections
143,147,148,435,506 R/w 149 of lPC and sections 3(1)(r)(s) of SC and ST,
POAAct 1989
The petition coming on for hearing, upon Perusing the Petition and the
affidavit filed in support thereof and the order of the High Court dated
20.08.2024, 28.08.2024, 04.09.2024, 20.09.2024, 01.10.2024, 23.10.2024 &
o6.ll.2024 made herein and ,,upon hearing the arguments Of SRI VENKAT
CHALASANI Advocate for the Petitioner, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondents and the Court made the following
ORDER
{ISri Pattabi Vemulapati, the learned senior counsel for some of the petitioners and sri siddarth Luthra, the learned Senior COunSel for respondent/state are present onl-Ine and all the learned counsels for petit-loners and learned public prosecutor for respondent/state are present.
Today, learned senior COunSel, Sri Siddarth Luthra has explained the call data details and diagrams drawn tO Summarize the COntentiOnS with reference to the call data. lt has been noticed that the offences are under sc, sT (POA) Act,1989 were or-lginally alleged and at a latter POint of time omitted. Much thereafter, they are Once again brought On record.
[t is |ln the light of such fact that has been brought to the attention of this court, -ln all these antic-lpatory bail applications, the question that emerges for cons-lderation would be about mainta-Inability of anticipatory bail in the teeth of section 14A of the SC, ST (POA) Act, 1989. That provis-Ion contemplates only an appeal and not a petition on the concurrent original jurisdiction Of the High Court.
By next occasion, learned COunSelS would address on this aspect of the matter at the first instance. It is only thereafter, rest Of the subm-lssions could be heard.
For convenience On both Sides, for hear-lng, list On 29.ll.2024 in the first page of the list.
T-Ill then, interim Order granted earlier shall stand extended."
_f\ _ _ ,_i._
-``
SD/-A. V!JAYA 'BABU
ISTRAR
//TRUE COPY// SECTION GFfF§C` ER
For A\ . I_-I+.I I |\n|\
To,
1. The Station House Officer, Ga'nnavaram, UPS, Krishna District
2. One CC to SRl. VENKAT CHALASANI Advocate [OPUC]
3. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court ofA.P[OUT]
4. One spare copy HIGH COURT DR.VRKS,J DATED:13/ll/2024 LIST ON 29.ll.2024 lN THE FIRST PAGE OF THE LIST.
ORDER CRLP.No.5652 of 2024 INTERIM ORDER EXTENDED