Sri Kandanala Kalyan Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

\
V

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶3

MONDAY ,THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 92 OF 2025

¶7

Appeal under Section 14A OF SC & ST (POA) Amendment^Act 2015, against the order dated 01.02.2025 passed in^{CrI.MP.No.46of2025} in Crime no. 2 of 2025 of II Town Police Station, Rajamahendrava^ramon the file of the Court of the Special Judge For Trial^{OfCasesUnderS.Cs&} S.Ts (P.O.A) Act - Cum - X Addl. District Judge At^{Rajamahendravaram.}

¶8

Between:

¶9

Sri Kandanala Kalyan, S/o. Surya Chandrarao, Aged 28^{yearsGuthulavari} Street, A.C. Gardens, Rajamahendravaram

¶10

...Appellant/Accused No.2

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through Station House^Officer, II Town Police Station, Rajamahendravaram Represented by Public^Prosecutor, High court of A.P

¶13

...Respondent

¶14

Counsel for the Appellant: SRI DUGGIRALA SUBASH

¶15

Counsel for the Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶17

APHC010070902025

¶18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶19

[3396]

¶20

MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶21

PRESENT

¶22

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶23

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 92/2025

¶24

Between:

¶25

SRI KANDANALA KALYAN, S/0. SURYA CHANDRARAO, AGED 28 YEARS GUTHULAVARI STREET, A.C. GARDENS, R AJ AM AH EN D RAVARAM

¶26

...APELLANT

¶27

AND

¶28

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, II TOWN POLICE STATION, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P ...RESPODENT

¶29

Counsel for the Appellant:

¶30

1.DUGGIRALA SUBASH

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent:

¶32

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶33

The Court made the following:

¶34

ORDER:

¶35

The present criminal appeal has been filed by the Appellant/Accu^sed No.2 seeking to set aside the Order dated 01.02.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.46 of 2025 in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the^{fileoftheCourtofSpecial} Judge for trial of cases under SCs & STs (PoA) Act-cum-X^{AdditionalDistrict} & Sessions Judge, Rajamahendravatam, and to release^himonbail. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 05.01.2024^atabout06.40 p.m., when the husband of the De facto Complainant^{andhisfriendswere} boarding a car at her house. Accused Nos.1 to 4 and^{6kepttheircarasa}

¶36

2

¶37

hurdle for their passage and Accused No.1 dragged the husband of the De facto Complainant from the car, Accused Nos.1 and 3 to 5 caught hold of him, Appellant/Accused No.2 beat him with a beer bottle on his forehead with an intention to kill him, beat him with hands and kicked him with legs, due to which, he sustained bleeding injuries. When the husband of De facto Complainant was running towards his house, Accused Nos.1 to 5 followed him and Accused No.1 threatened to kill him. When the De facto Complainant and her mother-in-law came for the rescue of the injured, the Accused beat them also and abused by touching their case and also threatened with dire consequences. 3. Heard Sri Duggirala Subash, learned counsel for the Appellant/Accused No.2 and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, representing the State/Respondent. 4. Learned counsel for the Appellant/Accused No.2 would submit that the Appellant herein belongs to SC community, as such, the prosecution against him for the offence under SCSI Act is not maintainable. Learned counsel would further submit that the husband of the De facto Complainant IS a rowdy sheeter and the present complaint has been filed with false allegations to implicate the Appellant in the alleged crime. It is submitted that material part of the investigation has been completed. Learned counsel would further submit that the Appellant has been in jail since 07.01.2025. Learned counsel would finally submit that the Appellant is ready to abide by

¶38

3

¶39

the conditions imposed in the event of grant of bail. Hence, prayed to enlarge the Appellant on bail.

¶40

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the petition^andwould submit that there are criminal antecedents against the Appellant. 6. The bail application filed before the trial Court^{hasbeendismissedvide} Order dated 01.02.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.46 of 2025 on the ground that material part of the investigation was pending. It is contended by the Appellant that he is falsely implicated in the present crime and as he belongs to SC Mala Community, the offence under SCSI Act is not maintainable against the Appellant.

¶41

A bare perusal of the copy of the Caste Certificate^{oftheAppellant} would disclose that he belongs to SC-Mala community. Further, copy of the Wound Certificate of the injured would disclose that^{theinjurysustainedby} him is a minor abrasion. In such circumstances, this^{Courtisoftheviewthat} it is not the stage to decide the culpability of the^{Appellant/AccusedNo.2inthe} commission of the alleged offences, by accepting the^{allegationsmakeagainst} him and it requires examination at full length of trial. 8. In view of the submission that the material part of the investigation has been completed and the Appellant /Accused No.2^{hasbeeninjudicial} custody since 07.01.2025, the question of tampering with the evidence, does not arise. In such circumstances, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Appellant / Accused No.2 on bail. However, it is made clear that the

¶42

4

¶43

observations made in this Appeal are with regard to granting of bail to the Appellant / Accused No.2, but not on the merits of the case. 9. In the result, the Criminal Appeal is allowed setting^{asidetheOrder} dated 01.02.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.46 of 2025 in Crime No.2 of 2025 on the file of the Court of Special Judge for trial of cases under SCs & STs (PoA) Act-cum-X Additional District & Sessions Judge, Rajamahendravaram and consequently bail is granted to the Appellant / Accused No.2 on the following conditions;

¶44

I. The Appellant / Accused No.2 shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for Rs.20,000/(Rupees twenty thousands only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶45

II. On release, the Appellant shall appear before the Station House Officer, concerned, twice in a week i.e., on every Saturday and Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m., until further^orders. The Appellant is directed not to hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶46

IV. It is made clear that the Appellant shall scrupulously comply with the above conditions and breach of any of the above conditions will be viewed seriously and prosecution is at liberty^tomovean

¶47