Single Judge criminal petition seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted earlier. The court found no specific grounds for cancellation as the accused complied with bail conditions and no misuse was established.
Criminal Petition No. 1270 of 2019 is dismissed with no order as to costs.
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.
THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1270 of 2019
ORDER :
Respondent No.2, who is accused No. 2, was granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 04.01.2019 by the XV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Kukatpally. The present petition is filed seeking cancellation of the said bail.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner/ de facto complainant that the lower Court has granted anticipatory bail to respondent No.2/ A2 taking into consideration that she is aged about 56 years and that she is a lady residing separately. He further contended that the address of respondent No.2 has been mentioned as she is staying in Krishna District but most of the time she used to stay in the house of A1 and because of her harassment, the deceased committed suicide. It is further submitted that by way of investigation it was established that there was constant harassment by A2. However, it was not taken into consideration at the time of granting anticipatory bail to her. Thus, it is prayed to cancel anticipatory bail granted to A2, vide order dated 04.01.2019.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned public prosecutor and perused the records.
It is contended by the learned counsel for respondent No.2 that subsequent to granting of anticipatory bail, respondent No.2/ accused No.2 has been complying with the conditions imposed on her while granting anticipatory bail and she has all along been cooperating with the
2
investigation of the matter. It is further contended that respondent No.2 has never misused the liberty granted to her.
Except the averments that the deceased was subjected to harassment by her husband and mother-in-law subsequent to her marriage and so she committed suicide and that the trial Court without looking into factual aspects granted anticipatory bail to respondent No.2, there is no other ground in the application that respondent No.2 has ever misused the liberty granted to her.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and as no specific ground has been made out for cancellation of bail granted to A2, this Court cannot consider the request of the petitioner.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
__________________
JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI
03.06.2019
vhb
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail granted to the accused should be cancelled in the absence of specific grounds proving misuse of liberty.
Whether age and gender of the accused constitute valid grounds for cancellation of bail already granted.
De facto Complainant
Accused No. 2
G. Sri Devi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
