Allowed

Syed hussain and another v. state of telangana

Telangana HC2 Mar 2018CRLP/2221/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to two accused persons facing charges under Sections 420, 468, and 471 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court held the underlying land sale dispute to be civil in nature and allowed bail contingent on surrendering within 15 days and complying with standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

ANTICIPATORY BAIL Granted to petitioners/accused 1 & 2, with direction to surrender within 15 days and execute bond of Rs. 20,000 each with 2 sureties.

Syed hussain and another Vs state of telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

I IIGH COU R]' O Ir .l U I) l(,\1'1, Ill,l .'l'^{I I} Y l)l.l{A B,\ t) I,-Ott TIIIT St'.{1'E OF TEI-,\N(i,,\N\ .\Nl)',I'llli Sl .'f^la, olf ,\Nl)lllt,\ l'lt.\l)liSII

¶2

FRIDAY. TIIE SECOND DAY OF MAR('IJ

¶3

TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHTEEN

¶4

: l,tu,lS tiN't:

¶5

TIIE IION'tlLE SNll',tUSl'lCE't. rr,.r,\Nr

¶6

CItll\IIN.\1. PIiTI'f I()N N(): ?l2l^()1.'201u

¶7

Betrvccn:

¶8

Syed IILrssain @r Moinu, S/o.Sycd Nahi

¶9

Armoor Narsinrha Reddy, S/o.Hanrnanth Reddy

¶10

.....I)ct ition crs/Accuscd No.l ln<l 2

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., Bliainsa^-fown Police Station, Nirnrai Distlict, Iiep.bv Public ProsectLtor, High Court, Hyderabad

¶13

. . ... Rcspondcnt/Conrplainant

¶14

Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying lhat in the circurnstances stated in the rnernorandurn ol'grounds tiled hercin the High Coun lllay bc ploased to enlarge the petitioners herein on bail intheever.rtof their arrest in connection with Cr.No.0l of 2018 of Blrainsa Torvn Police Station, N irrnal Distrrct.

¶15

T[.re petition cotning on ltrr hearing, upon penrsing the Petilion arrtl thc tnemorandam of grounds liled in support thereof and upon hearing the arguutents of Mr.B-Vrjay Bhaskar, Advocate tbr the Petitioners and olthe learned Public Prosecutor (TC) fbr llespondent.

¶16

Thc flogrt rn:rrlc lhc Iollorr ing Orrlcr:

¶17

SMT JUSTICE T.RAJANI

¶18

CRIMINAL PETITION N 0.2221 0F 2018

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 and 2, in Crime No.1 of 2018 on the file of the Station House Officer, Bhainsa town Police Station, Nirmal District. The offences alleged are under Sections 420,468 and 471 of r.P.c.

¶21

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

¶22

The case of the prosecution is that accused No.2, who is the owner of the land "which was made into plots, and accused No.1, who is the broker, entered into an agreement of sale with the de-facto complainant for sale of plot No.111 situated in Survey No.333 at Bhainsa Town and, after receiving advance sale consideration, did not execute the sale deed in favour of the de-facto complainant.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though the transaction pertains to the year 2014, de-facto complainant lodged the complaint only on 04.01 .201 B.

¶24

Learned Public Prosecutor does not refute those facts

¶25

Hence, considering the above, and the fact that the dispute between the parties is civil in nature, this Court is inclined to^grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 are directed to surrender before the Station House Officer, Bhainsa Town Police Station, Nirmal District, within 15 days from the date of this order. On such surrender, the

¶26

I \

¶27

¶28

petitione rs/accu sed Nos.1 and 2 shall be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,0001 (Rupees twenty 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 and 2 shall abide by the conditions mentioned under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., as under:

¶29

The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; 2) 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 3) The petitioners shall not leave lndia without the previous permission of the Court.

¶30

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

¶31

stand closed.

¶32

Sd/- N,PURUSHOTHAM^REDDY ASSISTANT STRAR

¶33

,TRUE COPY//

¶34

IioT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶35

¶36

l. The Juclicial Filst^{ClassMagistratc,At Bhainsa,Nirrnal District'}

¶37

The Station^{Housc O1licer, Bhaitlsa 'ftlr'r'u l'oliceStation.NirmalDistlict'}

¶38

i. Trvo CCls ro the^{Pr.rblicProsecutor(TG),lligh Cotrn at Hyderabad(OLJT)}

¶39

One CC to MR.B.Vrja.v^{Bhaskar, Ad'()cate} f^OPt'Cl

¶40

Ottc .1',.,1e^e,,1,r

lll(llt^coLIRl'

'I'R,.1

D'l^{ED:02'03'20ltt}

cRL.P.No.222l^{ol" 20ltl}

¶45

.\N'fICIPATORY^BAIL

¶46

'L\I $\t)
.{

Syed hussain and another v. state of telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed hussain and another v. state of telangana

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

Punam Satyanarayana Dora, Vs the State of a.P., Rep by Pp.

M.Dharma Reddy Vs State of Ap.

Dilip Maithy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mikkili Mariyamma Vs State of Ap.

Valaparla Nageshwar Rao Vs State of Ap.

D.Lakshmaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh