Allowed

Kothuri Atchyut (Atchaiah), M.a., v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC9 Oct 2013CRLP/11323/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court exercised discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to grant anticipatory bail to accused persons charged under the SC & ST (POA) Act, despite the bar in Section 18 of the Prevention of Atrocities Act, finding that allegations did not show intent to humiliate.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; surrender within 20 days; release on personal bonds of Rs.10,000 with two sureties for like sums.

Kothuri Atchyut (Atchaiah), M.a., Vs The State of Andhra… — Caste Atrocities | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

WEDNESDAY , THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER, TWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN

¶3

:PRESENT:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO CRLP .No.11386 of 2013

¶5

Between:-

¶6

1.Kolli Venkata Rao S/o. Chinnayya 2.Boddu Appa Rao S/o. Tata 3.Boddu Atchuta Rao S/o. Appa Rao 4.Kolli Sreenu S/o. Sri Ram 5.Kolli Sri Ram S/o. Appanna 6.Kolli Ramana Murthy S/o. Eshwar Rao 7.Gompa Naidu S/o. Mutyalayya 8.Gedela Eshwara Rao S/o. Sunni Babu 9.Vechelapu Naidu Babu S/o. Yernaidu 10.Dwarapu Reddy Sankara Rao S/o. Arjun 11.Matala Trimurthulu S/o. Devudaiah 12.Ravada Ramesh S/o. Satyam 13.Reddy Mahesh S/o. Ramu Naidu 14.Vehelapu Govinda S/o. Satyam 15.Gorla Palavelli S/o. Appa Naidu.

¶7

..... Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 to 15 in Cr.No. 48 of 2013 On the file of Devarapalli P.S., Visakhapatnam District

¶8

AND

¶9

The State of A.P., rep .by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.

¶10

.....Respondent/Respondent

¶11

Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the memo of grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime No. 48 of 2013 of Devarapalle Police Station, Visakhapatnam, in the event of their arrest.

¶12

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the Memo of Grounds filed herein, and upon hearing the arguments of SRI T.M.K. CHAITANYA, Advocate for the Petitioners and of the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of respondent-State, the Court made the following ORDER :-

¶13

“Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/A-1 to A-15 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State.

¶14

This criminal petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶15

The incident in this case arose out of recent panchayat

¶16

elections held in the State of Andhra Pradesh.

¶17

It is alleged in the F.I.R. that the petitioners abused the de facto complainant in his caste name as he and his people did not vote for the candidate proposed by the petitioners.

¶18

Contd..2..

¶19

- 2 -

¶20

Though, it is alleged in the F.I.R. that the petitioners attacked the de facto complainant and others with sticks, it seems that nobody received any injuries. Basing on the report of the de facto complainant, a case in Crime No.48 of 2013 of Police Station, Devarapalli was registered for the offences under Sections 147, 324, 506 r/w 149 of IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989.

¶21

In view of the specific bar in Section 18 of the Prevention of Atrocities Act, this Court cannot exercise jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to grant anticipatory bail if any of the offences under the Prevention of Atrocities Act is attracted.

¶22

In the F.I.R., it is mentioned that the petitioners abused in the caste name of the de facto complainant on the ground that he and his people did not vote for the candidate proposed by the petitioners in the panchayat elections.

¶23

Though, this Court is not supposed to scrutinize the allegations in the F.I.R., it can examine whether the allegations would attract the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC & ST (POA) Act. The offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act would attract if the accused intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view. Therefore, mere utterances in the name of caste would not attract the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act.

¶24

In this case, from the allegations, it cannot be said that the utterances were made with intent to insult or intimidate the de facto complainant. Therefore, this Court is inclined to exercise its discretion to grant anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. notwithstanding the bar under Section 18 of the Prevention of Atrocities Act.

¶25

Consequently, the criminal petition is allowed. The petitioners/A-1 o A-15 are directed to surrender before the Station House Officer, Devarapalle Police Station, Visakhapatnam within (20) days from the date of this order and thereafter, they shall be released on bail on their executing personal bonds in a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum each to the

¶26

satisfaction of the said S.H.O.”

¶27

Sd/- K.SRIDHAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶28

//TRUE COPY//

¶29

For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶30

To 1. The Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chodawaram, Visakhapatnam 2.The Station House Officer, Devarapalle Police Station, Visakhapatnam District. 3.Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad (OUT) 4.One CC to Sri T.M.K. CHAITANYA, Advocate (OPUC) 5.One spare copy

TKK

HIGH COURT

RKR.J

DATE: 09-10-2013

ANTICIPATORY BAIL ORDER

¶36

CRL.P. No. 11386 of 2013

¶37

BAIL GRANTED

¶38

DRAFTED BY TKK DT.11-10-2013.

HIGH COURT

RKR.J

DATE: 09-10-2013

ANTICIPATORY BAIL ORDER

¶43

CRL.P. No. 11386 of 2013

¶44

BAIL GRANTED

Kothuri Atchyut (Atchaiah), M.a., v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kothuri Atchyut (Atchaiah), M.a., 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

Machupalli Srinivasulu Naidu Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Balam Prasad Vs The State of Ap.

Smt. Padmaja Chowdary Vs State of A.P.

G.Raghunath Babu Vs The State of A.P.

M.Thimma Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

J.Hanumandlu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh