Allowed

Vade Krishna v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Mar 2021CRLP/1129/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana allowed a criminal petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. granted to Vadvu Krishna, accused of offences under IPC Sections 307, 324, 323, 149. The court conditioned the bail on his surrender within 15 days.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed bail on surrendering within 15 days on personal bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties.

Vade Krishna Vs The State of Telangana — Anticipatory Bail | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

[^3rs8 |

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR TTTE STATE OF TELANGANA AT ITYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY. THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

:PRESENT:

¶5

THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1129 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

Vadc Krishna, S/o. Venkappa,

¶9

Petitioner/Accused No. I

¶10

\l)

¶11

'Ihe State of1'elangana. Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State ofTelangana. at Hyderabad

¶12

Respondent/Cornplainant

¶13

Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the petilion and the grounds filed therein, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Pelitioner/Accused No.l on Anticipatory Bail in event of arrest in connection with CrimeiIIR No. 166 of 2020 on the file of Police Station, Mulakap ally, dt.29.12.2020 Bhadradri Kothagudem;

¶14

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petilion and the grounds filed therein, and upon hearing the arguments ofSri P.V. Ramana, Advocate for the Petitioner, and of the Addl. Public Prosecutor, for the Respondent, the Court made the following.

¶15

IIONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

¶16

C)RIMINAL PETITION NO.1 129 OF 2O2I

¶17

ORDER:

¶18

This Criminal Petition, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), is filed by the petitioner/A- 1, for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.166 of 2O2O of P.S. Mulakalapally, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 3O7, 324 and 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/A- i , the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent- State and perused the record.

¶20

The allegation against the petitioner/A-1 is that on 29.12.2O2O th,e de /acto complainant lodged a complaint stating that on 2a.12.2O2O at about 9 pm, the petitioner/A- 1 along with other accused assailed on her house and beat her father with stick on his head due to which he sustained severe head injury and as a result there 'r,ras nose bleeding and he became unconscior"rs. When the neighbours came to rescue, a1i the accused beat them with sticks on face, eye, legs and knee. Hence, the complaint.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner/A- 1 would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and never committed any offence as alleged by the respondent-po1ice. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen and has nothing to do with the alleged offence. Further, he is ready to give suflicient sureties to the satisfaction of this Court to secure his pre.sence on each and everl' date of hearing to lace the trial and also ready to abide by the terms and conditions if any that may be imposed by

¶22

_----.-.---...--

¶23

¶24

this Court for his release. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A- 1 .

¶25

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A- 1 and stated that the petitioner was involved in Crime No.105 of 2020 also.

¶26

It is submitted that the petitioner/A- 1 is the Village Revenue Officer of Rudrakshapaily Village and on the alleged date of occurrence, he was not even present at the place of occurrence and he has been falsely implicated in this case.

¶27

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the petitioner/A- 1 was not present at the place of occurrence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A- 1 on some conditions.

¶28

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the petitioner/A-1 is directed to surrender before the Station House Officer, P.S. Mulakalapally, Bhadradri Kothagudem^{District, within} a period of 15 days from the date of this order. On such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall^{reiease the} petitioner/A-1 on bail, on his executing^personal bond for a sum of Rs. 15,000/ - (Rupees fifteen thousand^{only) with two sureties for a} like sum each to his satisfaction^{On suchrelease, the} petitioner/A-1 shall also abide^{by the conditions stipulated in} Section a38(2) Cr.P.C^{and co-operatewith the investigatingofficer} in investigating the case.^{Further, he shall also furnishthe details} of his presence^{when the incidentwas occurred}

¶29

¶30

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand

¶31

closed.

¶32

¶33

SD/- B. SATYAVATHI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

.T ()

//TRUE COPY//

/ \U,

\J,/

SECTIYN O F}-ICER

I The V Addl. Distri,:t and Sessions Judge. Kothagudem, Khammam District. 'lhe Principal Junic,r Civil Judge, Kothagudem, Khammam District. 2l 'Ihe Station l{ouse Olficer, Mulakapalli, Bhadradri, Kothagudem Distri,:t. ,t 'Iuo CCs to Public Prosecutor. High Court of Telangana, at Hyderabad (OUT)

¶40

5 One CC to Sri P.V. Ramana. Advocate (OPUC) 6 one Spare Copy

¶41

HIGH^COI]RT

¶42

GSD,J

¶43

fRorr",^{oN 1e-3-202r}

¶44

DATIi:^19-3-2021

¶45

oRDIR

¶46

cRl,.P'^{No.1129 ()F 2021}

¶47

PETITION^ALLOWED

¶48

L L' EL1
\ g\us$q"' -"ii
+
n."-rrcll.'Y

Vade Krishna v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vade Krishna 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

Mr.Narender Kumar Patel Vs Directorate of Enforcement

Vodnala Rayamallu Vs The State of Telangana

S.Naga Subramanyam (A-4) Vs The State of Telangana

Tapre Sudhakar, Adilabad Dist Vs Public Prosecutor, Adilabad Dist and Another

Smt. Chelkuri Andalu , Anuradha Vs The State of Telangana

Gundari Nagaraju Vs The State of Telangana