Allowed

Kanamala Kiran Kumar v. The State of A.P.

Telangana HC12 Oct 2012CRLRC/1921/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision, the High Court assessed the cancellation of bail granted to an accused charged under IPC Sections 417, 376, and 506. Finding the lower court unjustified in cancelling bail without substantial evidence of threats, the revision was allowed, and the accused was directed not to enter Krishna District.

What did the court decide?

The order cancelling the bail is set aside; the accused is directed not to enter the Krishna District for a period of three months.

Kanamala Kiran Kumar Vs The State of A.P. — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1921 OF 2012

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This revision is filed by the petitioner-accused challenging the order, dated 3.10.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Vijayawada, in Crl.M.P.No.1437 of 2012 in Crime No.279 of 2012 S.N. Puram P.S.

¶4

The above Crime was registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 376 and 506 IPC. The petitioner-accused was granted bail vide Crl.M.P.No.1310 of 2012 on 31.8.2012. Subsequently, on the complaint given by the de facto complainant alleging that after release, the petitioner-accused used to threaten her and other witnesses, another case in Crime No.573 of 2012 was registered against the petitioner-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 506 and 509 IPC, in which also, the accused was released on bail. While so, the respondent-complainant filed the above Crl.M.P. for cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner-accused in Crime No.279 of 2012. The Court below cancelled the bail granted to the petitioner-accused vide the order impugned herein. Hence, the present revision is filed by the petitioneraccused.

¶5

Heard and perused the material available on record.

¶6

Learned Counsel for the petitioner-accused submitted that the petitioner never threatened the de facto-complainant or any witnesses and he is ready to abide the conditions that would be imposed by this Court and that he was in jail for 116 days in earlier case and that he is a car driver and he is only the bread-winner of his family.

¶7

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the Court below is not justified in canceling the bail and therefore, the order under revision is liable to be set aside.

¶8

Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed setting aside the order under revision. However, the petitioner-accused is

¶9

directed not to enter into the Krishna District for a period of three months.

¶10

Consequently, Miscellaneous petitions pending in this revision stand closed.

¶11

_________________ Justice Raja Elango

¶12

Dated: 12.10.2012 Nn.

¶13

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶14

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1921 OF 2012

¶15

12.10.2012 Nn.

Kanamala Kiran Kumar v. The State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanamala Kiran Kumar v. The State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lanka Sanyasi Rao, Vs State of A.P.

Dunthuluri Venkateswar Rao, Vs Gangapatilla Murali

Kota Venkata Rama Rao, (A-4), Vs Kota Lakshmi Tulasi , Tulasamma

Chinthala Ravi Vs The State of a.P., through Sho.

Ramdas, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Nagaraju Bhaskar. B Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh