Disposed

Gandham Krishna, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC24 Sept 2014CRLP/11354/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed the petitioner's claim for anticipatory bail as he does not deserve it, but balanced personal liberty by disposing the petition with liberty to move for regular bail and surrender. The court directed the Special Judge to hear the bail application on the same or next day after notice.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to move regular bail application and surrender; directions to Special Judge to consider bail application promptly with specific conditions.

Gandham Krishna, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Anticipatory Bail | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE Dr.JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.11354 of 2014

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C by petitioner/A2 in Crime No.130 of 2014 of Guntur Taluq Police Station, Guntur District, registered against him for the offence punishable under Sections 198, 200, 323, 420, 466, 468, 477 and 506 I.P.C.

¶4

2. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent-State. Perused the material placed on record.

¶5

3. A1 is vendor of the petitioner and A3 to A5 are attestors and scribe. The allegations in the report lodged by the de facto complainant

¶6

are that the land to an extent of Ac.3.22 cents was in possession and cultivation of father of the complaint for the last 60 years. Out of the same, the complainant purchased Ac.1.86 cents in D.No.26/1A & 26/1C from the father of A1 under an unregistered agreement of sale dated 11.06.1992 and remaining Ac.1.36 cents bequeathed in his favour and executed gift deed infavour of his wife for an extent of Ac.0.99 cents, who in turn sold the same to V.Rambabu. A1 and A2 in collusion as if they got title over the property created the registered sale deed.

¶7

4. The contention of the petitioner is that he is a bonafide purchaser and the so called unregistered contract for sale in favour of the complainant or his father does not convey any title and it is purely civil dispute and he is entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail.

¶8

5. The question of whether the petitioner is a bonafide purchaser or whether there is any collusion, has to be decided ultimately from the end of investigation, which is in progress and the petitioner there from unsuccessful by order of the learned Sessions Judge twice seeking for anticipatory bail vide Crl.M.P.Nos.1634 and 1764 of 2014 dated

¶9

25.08.2014 and 10.09.2014, respectively.

¶10

6. Taking into consideration of the above facts, though, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail but for as part of duty of the Court to balance with personal liberty, rather than dismissal, this petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to move regular bail application and surrender before the learned Special Judge concerned and after notice to the Public Prosecutor and in such an event, the learned Judge is required to consider the application granting bail preferably on the same day, if not atleast on next day. The learned Judge in granting bail as per directions supra can impose necessary conditions which include furnishing of address proof with bank account particulars if any for securing presence before Court non-interference with witnesses and the like and any necessity of police custody vide guidelines of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab^[1] .

¶11

7. Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of.

¶12

__________________________ Dr. B.SIVA SANKARA RAO J,

¶13

September 24, 2014 pab

¶14

[1] (1980)2 SCC 565

Gandham Krishna, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gandham Krishna, 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mirza Mustafa Ali Baig Kamal Vs Smt. Azra Shahen

K.Veera Raghava Reddy, Vs The STate of Telangana

chodagiri vijaya kumar , Galebu Vs The State of A.P.

Surendra Naidu, Vs The State of A.P.

Sri Pallerlamudi Venkata Rajendra Prasad, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Jangam Veera Sasidhar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh