The High Court held that criminal petitioners accused of managing a fraudulent money-circulation scheme are not fit cases for anticipatory bail. The petitions were dismissed with a direction to surrender and seek regular bail.
All criminal petitions dismissed. Petitioners directed to surrender before the Court and seek regular bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.5509, 5510, 5511 & 5512 of 2012
DATE: 16.06.2012
Crl.P.No.5509 of 2012
Between: Chinthaguntla Kriran Kumar and 6 others …… Petitioners And The State of A.P, rep. by its Public Prosecutor …..Respondent Crl.P.No.5510 of 2012 Between: Chebrole Ijak @ Issak …… Petitioner And The State of A.P, rep. by its Public Prosecutor …..Respondent Crl.P.No.5511 of 2012 Between: Chebrole Ijak @ Issak …… Petitioner And The State of A.P, rep. by its Public Prosecutor …..Respondent Crl.P.No.5512 of 2012 Between: Chinthaguntla Kiran Kumar and another …… Petitioners
And
The State of A.P, rep. by its Public Prosecutor
…..Respondent
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.5509 to 5512 of 2012
COMMON ORDER :
The petitioners in all these criminal petitions are accused of offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 406, 420/34 I.P.C and Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999. It is alleged that all the petitioners who are family members have been collecting amounts for I.H.O and M.P.S.S organisations under a scheme in which the members have to pay Rs.4,700/- or Rs.6,000/- at the time of joining membership. It is alleged that such members will be getting Rs.1,500/- per month for 24 months or Rs.4,000/- per month for 22 months. According to the defactocomplainants, the scheme failed and there was default in fulfilling the commitments. Though the petitioners are not promoters of I.H.O or M.P.S.S organisations, they were alleged to be looking after management of the said organisations at Markapur in making collections etc. It is
contended by the petitioners’ counsel that the petitioners themselves are in the nature of victims as they have also become members in those schemes. Naturally in a money circulation scheme, only members can enrol further members and ultimately the last joined members will become the victims. Having regard to the allegations in these matters, this Court is of the opinion that these are not fit cases for granting anticipatory bail to any of the petitioners.
2) In the result, all the petitions are dismissed. The petitioners are directed to surrender before the Court and seek regular bail thereafter.
_______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J
July 16, 2012 ksh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail can be granted where the accused are alleged to be looking after management of fraudulent schemes.
Whether the petitioners, who are also alleged members of the scheme, are victims and fit for anticipatory bail.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Chinthaguntla Kriran Kumar and 6 others
Chebrole Ijak @ Issak
The State of A.P, rep. by its Public Prosecutor
Samudrala Govindarajulu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
