Allowed

Bhukke Govind Naik at Jumma, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Aug 2023CRLP/5409/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted statutory bail to the petitioner accused of counterfeit currency and cheating offences, dismissing prosecution objections as the charge sheet was not filed within 90 days of arrest.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail via personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties, directed to appear twice weekly and not hamper investigation or cooperate with prosecution witnesses.

Bhukke Govind Naik at Jumma, Vs The State of Andhra… — Cheque Dishonour | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

''\

¶2

lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

:PRESENT:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CRIIVIINAL PETITION NO.I 5409 OF 2023 E=

¶5

Betwee n :

¶6

Bhukke Govind Nal'k @ Jumma, S/o. Ramana Naik Aged about 43 years, Occ. BusI'neSS, R/o.D.No.3/121, Kummaravandlapalli village, Kadiri Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District, Erstwhile Ananthapur District.

¶7

E= ...Petjtjoner/Accused AND

¶8

The State ofAndhra Pradesh, Rep., by lots Public Prosecutor, Hl|gh Court ofA.P., at Amaravathi.

¶9

...Respondent

¶10

~ Petition under 6=c n 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C I-S filed prayl'ng that in the clrcumstances stated in memorandum of grounds of criminal petition is filed the High court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner/Accused on bail in connectl-on with the crime No.79 of 2023 of Mudigubba police station, Mudigubba of sri satya sai District, erstwhile Ananthapuram District.

¶11

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and memorandum of grounds of criminal petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri ch.vjdyasagar, Advocate for the petitioner and public prosecutor for the Respondent, the court made the following;

¶12

ORDER:

¶13

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

¶14

ELP_,NO-5409 OF_2Q2E

¶15

ORDER.. -

¶16

This Criminal Petition, under Sections 437 and 439 of cr.p.c., has been filed by the petitioner/sole accused, seeking regular bail, in crime No.79 of 2023 of Mudigubba Police station, sri satya Sai Distr'lCt.

¶17

A case has been registered against the Petit'lOner herein for the offences punishable under sections.489 (A) (B) and 420 IPC.

¶18

Heard. PeruSedthe record.

¶19

The case Of the PrOSeCut-Ion Succinctly is thus:-

¶20

on 16-05-2023 at about 1.30 A,M the Inspector Of police, Mudigubba Police Station intercepted the Car of the petitioner bearing registrat'lon No.AP-39-NQ-9798 near Railway Gate, Kadiri Road, Mudigubba Village and Mandal. when the car was checked, the Inspector Of Pol'lce found fake 50O rupees Currency notes, WOrth Rs.21,00,000/-, four Rs.500/- genuine Currency totes, 50 grams Of Original gold coin, one gold coated b-lSCu'lt Wg.100 grams and One gold

¶21

•t+

¶22

coated chain wg.about 185 grams and he seized the same under a cover of panchanama. It is alleged that the petitioner used to keep one original 500 rupee note on the top and used to keep fake currency notes underneath the original note. On the basis of the said allegations, the present crime was regI'Stered against the Petitioner.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that earlier bail application filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this court vide Order, dated 20JO7-2023 in CrI.P.No.4851 of 2023, He further con'tended that the petitioner was arrested On 14-05-2023 and since then he is in J-udiCial Custody. He further contended that though statutory period of 90 days has elapsed since the date of remand of the petitioner, the police could not file the charge sheet. As such, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled for a statutory bail.

¶24

On the other hand, the learned special Assistant Public Prosecutor, on instructions, confirms that the police have not filed the charge sheet even after lapse of 90 days from the date of remand of the petitioner.

TE-

HZ=

.,:-.----------,-i-is

¶29

In that view of the matter, as the police could not file the charge sheet even after expiry of statutory period of 90 days, this court is incll'ned to grant bail to the petitioner on the following conditions:-

¶30

(i) The petitioner herein shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of Fi+st Class, Kadiri, Sri Satya Sai |District (formerly Ananthapuramu

¶31

District) ;

¶32

(ii) On release, the petitioner shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned twice in a week i.e., on every Monday and Thursday between 10.00 a.m. and 01.00 p.m., until further orders.

¶33

(iii) Further, the petitioner is directed not to hamper the investigation and Camper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶34

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶35

___ _ _i

¶36

Sd/- P, VINOD KUMAR , ASSISTAN

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER For/

Tol

The Special Sessions Judge, for trial of cases under sos & STs (POA) Act-GumVIll Additional District Judge, Ananthapuramu.

¶41

The Judicial Magistrate of I Class Court at Kadiri, Sri Satya Sai District, erstwhile Ananthapuram District.

¶42

The Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Kadiri, Sri Satya Sai District, earstwhile, Ananthapuram District.

¶43

The Station House Officer, Mudigubba Police Station, Mudigubba of Sri Satya Sai District, erstwhile Ananthapuram District.

¶44

One CC to Sri. Ch.Vidyasagar, Advocate [OPUC]

¶45

Two cos to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP [OUT] 7. One spare copy

HIGH COURT

KSRJ

DATED : 17/08/2023

ORDER

CRLP.No.5409 of 2023

ALLOWED

JS
I.tr -L-<br>I? {\hl},, '?iv

Bhukke Govind Naik at Jumma, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhukke Govind Naik at Jumma, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashapak Ashraf Khan Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Binny.Niranjan Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Manchala Kiran Raju Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Yenneti Durga Prasad at Durga Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Ettapuram Kandathil Irshad at Irshad E.K Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Pallacholla Chaitanya Ram Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh