Allowed

Eidupugati Venkata Laxmi v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Mar 2020CRLP/778/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal petition under Sections 437 and 439 Cr.P.C., the High Court granted bail to the petitioner, an accused No. 3 implicated in rape and other offences involving a child, subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 15,000 each.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the petitioner upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties of similar amount.

Eidupugati Venkata Laxmi Vs The State of Telangana — Caste Atrocities | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA TIJESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND.]iMENTY

¶2

:PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 778 OF 2020

¶4

Between:

¶5

Eidupugati Venkata Laxmi, Wo. Ramesh Babu

¶6

Petitioner/Accused No.3

¶7

AND

¶8

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

¶9

Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C, praying that iq, the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant bail to the petitioner/A3 and direct the concerned to release her on bail in Crirne No.378/2018 of Police Station, Godavarikhani 1 Town, under sections 376(2) (0(tXo), 37 6, 506, 323, I.P.C Sec 5 ( 1)(m)(o) r/w 6, 2l of Protection of Children from sexual Offences Act,2012 and Sec. 3 (s), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Act

¶10

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition aln-d^-lie affidavit filed in supporl thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M SALEEM Advocate for the Petitioner, THE PITBLIC PROSECUTOR (TG) for the Respondent and the Court made the fbllou,ing.

¶11

ORDER

¶12

THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI

¶13

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.778 Of 2O2O

¶14

ORDER:

¶15

This Criminal Petition, under Sections 437 and 439 Cr.P.C., is filed by the petitioner/accused No.3 seeking to enlarge her on bail in Crime No.378 of 2018 on the file of Godavarikhani Police Station, Ramagundam District, registered for the offences^punishable under Section 376(2X0(iXa) IPC and Section 3^(1Xs) of STs and^SCs (POA) Act.

¶16

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

¶17

The brief facts of the case as^per the complaint are that in between 15.6.2018 to 30.6.2018 at Aadharana Nissahaya Children Home, Lenin Nagar, Godavarikhani, accused No.1 forcibly participated in sexual intercourse with the de facto complainant three tlmes and she informed the same to accused No,2 and accused No,3, who are Home Incharge, but they beat her with hands and legs and abused her in the name of her caste and later, accused Nos.2 and 3 shifted the de facto complainant to Heaven of Hope School and Hostel at Mancherial and threatened her with dire consequences if she informed accused No.1's sexual intercourse to anybody and later, she informed the same to Mancherial Hostel warden. Hence, the complaint.

¶18

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that at the outset the petitioner is innocent and she has nothing to do with the alleged offence committed by accused No.1 against the victim but at the instance of the de facto complainant, she has been falsely implicated in this case, It is further submitted that as per the record, during the course of investigation, nothing has been brought on record to connect the petitioner to the alleged offence which is said to have occurred on 15.6.2018 and the complaint was lodged on 29.7.2018 in order to make false accusations against the petltioner, to harass and blackmail her. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner has surrendered before the Court concerned on 2L.L.2020 and she is in custody since that date without there being any allegations against her; that the petltioner is the sole bread winner of her famlly and she is a law abiding citizen and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed and is also ready to furnish sufficient solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the Court in the event of her enlargement on bail.

¶20

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor though opposed to grant bail to the^petitloner, however, conceded to the fact that accused Nos.l and 2 in this crime were already enlarged on bail and present petitioner has surrendered before the Court concerned on 2L.07.2020, by virtue of orders of this Court and she is in custody since that date.

¶21

Thus, looking into the nature of allegations levelled against the^petitioner and other{acts and circumstances of the case, without

¶22

¶23

adverting into the merits of the case, I am inclined to^grant bail to the petitioner on her furnishing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand only) with two sureties to the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned V Additional Sesslons Judge (SCs & STs) Court, Karimnagar. The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and shall co-operate with the investigating agency and she shall not misuse the liberty granted to her.

¶24

Subject to the above, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶25

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal

¶26

petition, shall stand closed.

¶27

Sd/-^{\4. MANJ} ULA Tru{Ji 1.SS)S'I'ANT^RE

¶28

//TRUE^COPY'

¶29

FOT ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

¶30

to',. ,n. V Additional Session Judqg (fcs u STI:-:.'n at Karimnagar i. iil.^{srp..*tendent,Sub-Jail' KarimnagarDistrict} 3. The^{Station H""t oil;;;' iJt'"'il'r'7"i Police Stati6n'Ramagundam} ; o;;;4,"^{sRI M sALEEMAdvocate{oPUCl} 5. Two^{CC'sto p'Ufit iiiJut"'' fftgf'C'ourt for the State of Telanganaat} HYderabad^(OUT) -

¶31

One^{sPare coPY}

Avs

HIGH COURT

GSDJ

DATED:03/03/2020

ORDER

CRLP.No.778 of 2020

"s
$"
<br>I]AIL
l---'

Eidupugati Venkata Laxmi v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eidupugati Venkata Laxmi 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

T.Raghu babu Vs The state of Telangana

Ajith Nair, Warangal., Vs State of Ap., Rep Pp and 3 Otrs.

Anchoori Rekha Vs Smt.Mahankali Sravanthi

Md. Vajeed , Wajeed Vs The State of Telangana

Kothamsau Venkata Ram Kiran Vs State of Telagana

Thonda Ravi Vs The State of Telangana