Allowed

Tiruveedhi Yesepu , Vijay, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC16 Jun 2017CRLRC/1467/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal revision, the High Court allowed the petition filed under CrPC Sections 397 and 401. The court modified the impugned order dismissing the bail recall petition by directing the petitioner to surrender within two weeks. Upon surrender, he was enlarged on bail with a personal bond and two sureties, keeping the NBW in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender within two weeks; enlarged on personal bond for Rs.50,000 with two sureties; NBW kept in abeyance.

Tiruveedhi Yesepu , Vijay, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SEETHARAMA MURTI CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 1467 OF 2017

¶2

ORDER :

¶3

This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner/A1, under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity, ‘the Code’) having been aggrieved of the order, dated 03.05.2017, passed in Crl.M.P.No.155 of 2018 in S.C.No.564 of 2012 on the file of the Court of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool, whereby his petition under Section 70(2) of the Code for recalling the NBW issued against him was dismissed.

¶4

2. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner/A1 and of the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Andhra Pradesh. I have perused the material record.

¶5

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner could not attend before the trial court on account of his illhealth and that in support of the said submission medical certificate could not be produced before the trial court and that on that ground, the impugned petition was dismissed. Learned counsel would further submit that a medical certificate was submitted along with the material papers and that the petitioner/A1 is prepared to appear before the trial court on the date of every adjournment during the trial and abide by any conditions, which may be imposed, while recalling the NBW.

¶6

4. Learned Public Prosecutor, while supporting the order impugned, would submit that as per the instructions received there is one more case pending against the present petitioner-A1 and that the accused 2 and 3 in

¶7

¶8

the Sessions Case are regularly appearing before the Sessions Court and that the progress in the Sessions Court is stalled as the present petitioner/A1 is absconding.

¶9

5. Having regard to the facts and submissions, this Court is of the considered view that an opportunity can be given to the petitioner/A1 by modifying the orders impugned in this revision.

¶10

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the petitioner/A1 is directed to surrender before the court below/trial court within two weeks from today. Nevertheless, on such surrender of the petitioner/A1 before the trial court, as directed, he shall be enlarged on bail on his executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties, viz., one relative and one Government employee, in a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool. As a sequel to this order, the NBW issued against the petitioner shall remain in abeyance. On failure of the petitioner to comply with the above directions, the trial Court is at liberty to proceed against the petitioner/A1 in accordance with the procedure established by law and the order keeping the NBW in abeyance shall stand revoked.

¶11

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶12

__________________________________ JUSTICE M.SEETHARAMA MURTI

¶13

June 16, 2017 LMV

Tiruveedhi Yesepu , Vijay, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tiruveedhi Yesepu , Vijay, 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

P.Raghuveer Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Bikas Biswas, Vs The state of Telangana

B. Manipal Reddy, Vs Satti Amara Reddy

K.Srinivasa Kumar Vs Chalapathi Chits Pvt., Limited

Chinta Naga babu Vs Chinta Rajani

Manti Kishore Kumar Vs The State of A.P