A single judge dismissed the criminal petition seeking bail for two accused charged with attempt to murder and offences under the Indian Arms Act, noting their involvement in numerous similar cases and an earlier objection by the prosecution.
Petition dismissed; bail denied; trial Court directed to dispose CC expeditiously.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.10433 of 2016
ORDER:
The petitioners/A.1 & A.2 filed the present Criminal Petition under Sections 437 and 439 Cr.P.C. seeking enlargement on bail in Crime No.98 of 2015 of Nakrekal Police Station, Nalgonda District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307 r/w 34 IPC and Section 25(1)(A) of Indian Arms Act.
The case of the prosecution is that on 26.05.2015, while police personnel were on duty to prevent snatchings, apprehended the petitioners/A.1 & A.2 under suspicious circumstances. But, A.2-who was the pillion rider of the motorcycle, escaped from the scene of offence by pointing out the pistol.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the application.
As seen from the record, earlier petitions i.e., Crl.P.Nos.9613, 9614 & 9709 of 2016 filed by the petitioners, seeking bail were rejected on the ground that the petitioners were involved in 29 cases of similar nature.
Having regard to the above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners/A.1 and A.2. However, the trial Court should dispose of the C.C. as expeditiously as possible.
Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.
__________________ C.PRAVEEN KUMAR, J
25.07.2016 ska
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to petitioners charged with attempt to murder and possession of arms considering involvement in multiple similar cases.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
A.1
A.2
C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
