Partly allowed

Thippannagari Sankar Reddy Kadapa Dt. v. the State of Ap. Rep Pp and Anr.

Telangana HC3 Apr 2017CRLRC/913/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a criminal revision filed by an accused to recall a non-bailable warrant and impugned the dismissal of a bail application. It held that bail not expressly cancelled by the Court remained valid, but granted liberty to appear with fresh solvency on the earlier bond.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to appear in person, give fresh solvency, and deposit penalty on the earlier bond, directing the Magistrate to impose penalty before acceptance of fresh solvency.

Thippannagari Sankar Reddy Kadapa Dt. Vs the State of Ap… — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO

¶2

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.913 of 2017

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

Aggrieved by the order dated 14.03.2017 in Crl.MP.No.791 of 2017 in C.C.No.695 of 2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tadipatri, this revision is filed by the petitioner/ accused.

¶5

2. The revision petitioner is the accused in the said C.C. in which cognizance was taken for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A I.P.C. and 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 3. Earlier, the accused was granted concession of bail in the crime stage and pending investigation, his appearance was dispensed with. But after filing of final report and cognizance taken for the offences supra, there is no appearance of the petitioner and even summons issued by the learned Magistrate for the address furnished in the bail application were unserved, as a result, the learned Magistrate issued N.B.W. When the same sought for recall including from absence of the petitioner/ accused, the same was dismissed on 14.03.2017. It is impugning the same, the revision is maintained.

¶6

4. The offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. is a non-bailable offence. The bail granted by this Court is under Section 439 Cr.P.C. There is no cancellation of the bail, once granted, shall enure till the end of trial. Once bail is not cancelled either under

¶7

¶8

Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. or any power conferred in the bail order by this Court on the learned Magistrate pursuant there to, if not even under Section 437(5) Cr.P.C, under Section 446 Cr.P.C. there is a forfeiture of the bond, by imposing penalty for noncompliance of the original bail conditions.

¶9

5. Having regard to the above, there is nothing to interfere with the impugned dismissal order of the learned Magistrate but for to give liberty to the petitioner to appear in person and give fresh solvency and on the earlier bond, directing the Magistrate to impose penalty to pay before acceptance of the fresh solvency. If accused paid the penalty, there is no need of enforcing the same against the earlier surities, whose bonds to be cancelled forthwith in obtaining fresh bonds.

¶10

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of.

¶11

7. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶12

Date:03-04-2017 pab

¶13

¶14

HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO

¶15

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.913 of 2017

¶16

DATE: 03.04.2017

¶17

pab

Thippannagari Sankar Reddy Kadapa Dt. v. the State of Ap. Rep Pp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thippannagari Sankar Reddy Kadapa Dt. v. the State of Ap. Rep Pp and Anr.

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

Mr. D. Nagaraj Vs the State of Telangana

Syed Ibrahim Vs Raziya Sultana

Modumpuram Rama Krishna Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.P.Ratna Kumari Vs The State of Ap.

Satyala Hajarath Vs Satyala Khaja Bee

R. Vinod Kumar Vs The State of Telangana