Allowed

Mokkala Rama Krishna, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC5 Mar 2018CRLP/2156/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad granted anticipatory bail to five petitioners accused under Sections 306, 498-A, and 506 IPC in a suicide case. Finding the nexus between the suicide and the petitioners' conduct remote, the Court directed surrender within 15 days.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail; direction to surrender within 15 days; grant of bail upon surrender on personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Mokkala Rama Krishna, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Matrimonial and Divorce | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

H IGH COUIi.T O F .I U D I C]ATT] RE A1- TI Y D I,] RABAD FOI{ TTIE STATE OF TELANGANA I\ND'I'HIi SI'A,TE OIi ANDIIRA PII.ADESTI , iVlOND,,\" TIIE FIFTII DAY OI'MAR('f I

¶2

. T\VO THOUSAND AND EICHTEEN

¶3

:PI{ESENT:

¶4

Tl{E HO..'BLtl Si\lT..lUSTtCE^-t. R,,I,\Nl

¶5

CRINIINAI, PETI'I'ION NO: 2156 OF 20itt

¶6

Between:

¶7

1 . Mokkala Rarna Krishna s/o late Mokkala Rarranna

¶8

Mokkala Peddi Raju S/o Latc Mokkala Rarnannr

¶9

N. Ramarlcvi W/o N. Venakta Ilarnana

¶10

Derangalu Lakshmi Devi, Wto D. Venkltesu

¶11

\rallepu Rajarnma, Wio Vallepu Ravi

¶12

Pctitionels

¶13

AND

¶14

l. The State of Andhra Pradesh. Rep. by its Pr,rl-rlic Prosecr.rtor, lligh Court of Juclicature, at Hyderabad, fbr the State ofT'elangana and tlre Statc of Antlhra Pradesh, Hydelabad.

¶15

1. Mokkala Kiran Kumar, S/o Mokkala Ranrakrishna, Rio Sinrhadlipuran.r Village and Manclal, YSR Kadapa District.

¶16

Ilesponilents,/Dclircto^{(-onrplairrant}

¶17

Petition under Section 4-18 of Cr.P.C., praying that in the circuurstanccs staterl in thc pctition and the grounds filed herein, the High Coru't nray be pleasctl k) grant anticil)ltory barl to the petitioners in the event of arrest in Crime^viclo FIR. No. 130 ol' 2017 on thc filc ot thc PS Sir.r.rhadripurarn, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District;

¶18

Counsel for the Petition ers

¶19

sR l .'.tt..\ \ L\ t{.'f II

¶20

Counscl for thc llcspontlent No.I

¶21

PUBLIC PITOSECU'l'OR, (AP)

¶22

Thc⁽ ourt nrx(lc lhc lollorr irrg :

¶23

SMT JUSTICE T.RAJANI

¶24

CRIMINAL PETITION No.2156 OF 2018

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 to 5, in Crime No.130 of 2017 on the file of the Station House Officer, Simhadripuram Police Station, Kadapa District. The offences alleged are under Sections 306,498-A and 506 R/w.34 of l.P.C.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State, and perused the record.

¶28

As per the case of the prosecution, the 1't petitioner filed a divorce petition against the deceased, who is his wife, and subsequently there were reco nciliatio ns. But being vexed with her life, as the lstpetitioner did not take her back to his house, she committed suicide.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the deceased committed suicide while she was residing with her parents.

¶30

Learned Public Prosecutor does not refute the submission of the petitioners'counsel.

¶31

I-. ^r tld

¶32

Hence, considering the above facts, which prima-facie showlthe nexus between the suicide committed by the deceased and the harassment made by the 1't petitioner is remote, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 are directed to surrender before the Station House Officer, Simhadripuram Police Station, Kadapa District, within 15 days from the date of this order. On such surrender, the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 shall be released on bail on each of them

¶33

\G"'-

¶34

¶35

executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,0001 (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the said Station House Officer. Further, on such release, the^{petitioners/accused} Nos.1 to 5 shall abide by the conditions mentioned under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., as under:

¶36

The petitioners shall make themselves available for

¶37

interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶38

The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any^police officer; and

¶39

The petitioners shall not leave lndia without the previous permission of the Court.

¶40

As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall

¶41

stand closed.

¶42

Sd/-.I"YAKAIA[t GISTRAR ASSISTANT

¶43

,TRUE COPY//

¶44

FoT ASSISTANT^RE,GISTRAR

¶45

¶46

l..lhelVAdditionalScssiotlsJudge,I(irdalla.YSRK^adapaDistrict. 2. The^{StLrtionHuuse ofucer. Si,"f;..rrip,,r,i," policcStation.Karlapa.YSlt.l(ailapaDistrict} 3.TrvclCCstoPub}ic,,,o."..,...,..-lnrtHiglrCourttllJtttlicatut.c.atFlydcr'.rhrrtl(oti1.) ,1. one CC to Sri N.V.R.Amanlath,^{Advocltc(OPUC)}

¶47

one^SPlreCol.rY

¶48

lil(;ll(otRt

¶49

I'R,.'

¶50

l),'l'l'l:05--1-20^{I ll}

¶51

() lt l) I,llt

¶52

crril..P. NO.^{2 156t)F 20lu}

¶53

l)Ilt1..('l lo\

¶54

.*s
,,
(

Mokkala Rama Krishna, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mokkala Rama Krishna, v. 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

Syed hussain and another Vs state of telangana

Tenugu Raju Vs the State of Telangana

Madasu Naga Durga Prasad Vs State of A.P.

Kandula Nagarjuna Vs State of Telangana

Sreenu Vs State of Ap.

Suksen Mandal Vs State of Ap.