Dismissed

Srikireddy Sreenivasulu Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Public Prosecutor

Telangana HC6 Feb 2015CRLP/396/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CJ Praveen Kumar J dismissed the anticipatory bail petition of petitioner No. 3 as the FIR disclosed sand seized from his land. Petitions by petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were dismissed as infructuous following their arrest and prior bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail to petitioner No. 3 denied; petitions of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 dismissed as infructuous.

Srikireddy Sreenivasulu Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra… — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶2

CRIMINAL PETITION No.396 of 2015

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The petitioners, who are accused Nos.3 to 5, filed present Criminal Petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking release in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.169 of 2014 of Gudur Rural Police Station, Nellore District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379 and 447 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 20 of the Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act, 1957.

¶5

The case of the prosecution is as under:

¶6

On reliable information, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Gudur Rural Police Station along with his staff and mediators proceeded to CJFS Government Lands of Chennur Village of Gudur Mandal and found 100 tractors of sand excavated illegally from Kaivalya river. Their enquiries revealed that the sand belonged to one Muppalla Chandramohan Reddy. Thereafter, they went to the land of Uggumudi Prabhakar Reddy (Petitioner No.2), where 75 tractor loads of sand which was excavated illegally from Kaivalya river was dumped. On enquiry it was found that the sand belonged to Indukur Janardhan Reddy, Srikar Reddy (petitioner No.1) and Srinivasulu Reddy. They also found 25 tractor loads of sand was dumped in the land which belonged to Venugopal Reddy (petitioner No.3). Basing on the search and seizure the above case came to be registered.

¶7

When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 were already arrested and released on bail. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition insofar as petitioner Nos.1 and 2 is dismissed as infructuous.

¶8

Insofar as petitioner No.3 is concerned, the learned counsel

¶9

submits that the land where the sand was seized does not belonged to petitioner No.3 and he has no connection with the said land and sand. He submits that the First Information Report is silent as to the survey number where the sand was dumped. In the absence of any material with regard to the ownership of the land he submits that petitioner No.3 is entitled for the relief as sought for.

¶10

Learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submits that the land belonged to petitioner No.3 and the police officials are collecting material from the revenue department with regard to the survey number.

¶11

The averments in the First Information Report disclose that 25 tractor loads of sand seized from the land belonging to petitioner No.3. Hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner No.3.

¶12

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed insofar as petitioner No.3. However, petitioner No.3, if so advised shall surrender before the Court concerned and move an application for bail after giving prior notice to the public prosecutor concerned, in which event the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law either on the same day or atleast on the next day.

¶13

________________ C.PRAVEEN KUMAR,J

¶14

06.02.2015 Note: Issue C.C. by Monday. B/o gkv

Srikireddy Sreenivasulu Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Public Prosecutor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srikireddy Sreenivasulu Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Public Prosecutor

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

B.Prakash, Vs The State of Telangana.

Mohd. Abdul Satthar Vs The State of Telangana

Pasuparthi Nagamani Vs The State of Ap.

P.Nagalakshmaiah Vs K.Madhavulu

Shaik Majeed Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Vaddey Yellaswamy Vs KArnam Venkata subbamma