Allowed

Angothu Ramu v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC17 Sept 2020CRLP/3608/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana allowed a criminal petition for bail under Sections 437 and 439 CrPC. The petitioner, accused in a drug offence, was sought to be released on a personal bond after noting that other accused were on bail and the case was for Section 313 examination.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner/A-3 released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties; conditions of Section 438 (2) CrPC applicable.

Angothu Ramu Vs The State of Telangana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

[3168 I

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY-

¶4

:PRESENT:

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN .--

¶6

CRI\IINAL PETITION NO: 3608 OF 2020 -.'

¶7

Behreen:

¶8

Angothu Ramu, S/o.Late Damlq

¶9

...Pctitioner/Accused No.3

¶10

AND

¶11

The State ofTelangana, Rep.by the Public Prosecutor, High Court ofTelangana at Hyderabad.

¶12

...,Respondent/Complainant

¶13

Petition under Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstancas stated in the grounds filed in support ofthe Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant bail to the petitioner/ .A3 in S.C.No.2 of 2019 on the file of the I Addl. Sessions Judge, Karimnagar in the interest ofjustice.,-

¶14

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearlng the arguments of SMT.UM,(DEVI NAMA Advocate for the Petirioner and PUBLIC PROSECUTOR tffifu the Respondent. the Coun made the following.

¶15

ORI)ER

¶16

THII HON'BLE JUSTICE K,LAKSHMAN

¶17

CRIIIIINAL PETITION No.3608 of 2O2O

¶18

ORDER:

¶19

This Crirninal Petition is filed seeking regular bai1. The petitioner is A-3 in S.C.No.2 of 2019 (Crime No.515 of 2018 of SHO, Godavarikhani-l (T) Police Station, Peddapalli Districl.) on the file c,f I Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar District. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 8(c) r/ w. Section 20(b) of NDPS Act, i985.

¶20

Heard Srnt. Uma Devi Nama, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/A-3 and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State. Perused the record

¶21

Smt. Uma Devi Nama, learned counsei appearing for the petitioner/A-3 rvould submit that S.C.No.2 of 2019 is coming for examinati:>n under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. She also contends that A-1 and A-2 were already enlarged on bail and the petitioner would cooperate for expeditious conclusion of trial.

¶22

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that the aliegation levelled against the petitioner is serious in nature.

¶23

KL, J Crl.P.No.3608 of2020

¶24

¶25

On a perusal of the record would show that the petitioner is in jail from 20.08.2019 and S.C.No.2 of 2019 is posted for examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and that A- 1 and A-2 were already enlarged on bail. Considering the said aspects, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner herein.

¶26

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioner/A-3 shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the I Additional Sessions Judge, Karimnagar District. Further, the petitioner/A-3 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 438 (2\ Cr.P.C and sha1l cooperate with the trial Court in concluding the trial.

¶27

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition, shall stand closed.

¶28

Sd/. I.NAGA^LAKSHMI ASSISTANT GISTIIAIi.

¶29

/iTRUE COPY'

¶30

SE,CTION FFICEIT.

¶31

T0 1. The I Additional^{Sessions Judge, KarimnagarDistrict' /}

¶32

The Superintendent,^{District Jail, Karimnagar--'-} ..

¶33

The Station^{HouseOfficer,Goaauurik}tani--f {f) Police Station' Peddapalli District'} +. O". CC t"^{SMT'UMA DEVI NAMAAdvocate[OPUC]/}

¶34

Two CCs^{to the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(p'Aiet'Courtat Hvderabad (OUT)-.} 6. One^sparecoPY

HIGH COTIRT

KL.J

DATED; 17.09.2020

cRL.P.NO.36ori OF 2020

¶39

ArE
cEt
(
za I
2t20
i c 1'lstP
t-
.l
t OESPAl

¶40

I]AII,

Angothu Ramu v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Angothu Ramu v. The 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

Dara Ragini Vs The State of Telangana

Jakkula Chandraiah and 2 others Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Yousuf Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Bonala Rajamani Vs State of Telangana

Chinna Rathod Vinod Kumar Vs the State of Ts

B. Ramesh Babu Vs Vakula Devi