Dismissed

Perumandla Narayana Goud and 2 Others v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC12 Apr 2021CRLP/1908/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal petition under Section 438 CrPC. The Court rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail due to specific allegations of humiliation and assault against the deceased, leading to his death. However, it directed petitioners to surrender within ten days and file a regular bail application.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected. Petitioners directed to surrender within ten days and file regular bail application.

Perumandla Narayana Goud and 2 Others Vs State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR ar nvorgnEe?r#E^{oF TELANGANA}

¶2

YgI^DtY^{rHE TWELFTH} DAY OF APRTL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE'

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

¶5

CRIMINAf_^pETtTtON No: 1908 oF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

Perumandla Naravana Goud, Slo_. Hanmandlu, Age _50 years, Occ. Business, R/o.H.No.2-170, B-andatingapur, nlnl. rnrarrimpiinuir,, Oiit/lJt, .f-"gr,:J[

¶8

Perumandla Venkatesh, S/o. Narayana, Age 31 Vears, Occ. private Employee, R/o. H.No.2-'179, Mudhirajwada, 6anOiln"sapui.,'nyrrrr.'roiJir'plTnir-,"6irirr""t, Jagtial.

¶9

Sama Anirudh, S/o. Devadas, Age 26 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.5_42, Bandalingapur, R/lr/. lbrahimpatnam, Dist'rict, Jagtial.

¶10

...Petitioners/Accused No.2,3 and 6

¶11

AND

¶12

State of Telangana, Though SHO Police Station lbrahimpatnam, represented by Public Prosecutor High Court for the State of Telangana.

¶13

...RespondenUComplainant

¶14

Petitlon under Section 438 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the lr,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to enlarge the^petitioners on bail in Cr. No. 22 ot 2021 on the file of S.H.O^Police Station lbrahimpatnam or direct^{Police,lbrahimpatnamto release the petitionerson} bail in the event of their arrest, in the interest of^justice.

¶15

This Petition coming o.n for hearing,^{upon perusingthe lvlemorandumof} Grounds of criminal Petition and^{upon hearingthe argumentsof Sri Kondadi Ajay} Kumar, AdvOcate for the Petitioners^{and the Assistant Public ProseCutOr qn behalfof} the Respondent.

¶16

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶17

THE HONOURABLE^{JUSTICE G' SRI DEVI} CRIMI NAL^{PETITI ON No.1 908of 7021}

¶18

@EB:

¶19

The^{present Criminat Petition under Section 438 of the Code} of Crimjnat^{Procedure,1973, is fited by the petitioners/A.2,A-3} and A-6 seeking^{to grant anticipatory ba'it in the event of their} arrest in connection^{with Crime No'22 of 2021 of lbrahimpatnam} Potice Station,^{Jagtial District.}

¶20

Heard the learned^{counsel appearing for the petitioners,} learned Assistant Pubtic^{Prosecutorappearing for the respondent-} State and^perused the^record.

¶21

Learned counse[ for the^{petitioners woutd submit that the} petitioners are innocent of the offences atteged against^themand they have been fatsety imptication in cottusion^{with the de} facto complainant. He further submitted that the deceased^{was facing} troubtes created by his famity members and due to depression only he had committed suicide and the^petitioners are not responsibte for the death of the deceased. He atso submits that the^petitioners are ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed in the event of their entargement on anticipatory bait.

¶22

Learned Assistant Pubtic Prosecutor opposed to^grant anticipatory bait to the petitioners.

¶23

As seen from the contents of F.l.R., there are specific attegations against the petitioners that in the panchayat the petitioners, atong with other accused, have humi[iated the

¶24

¶25

deceased and atso assautted him before the etders. As the deceased could not bear the said humitiation and insult, he had committed suicide. The other accused have atready been arrested and they are in custody.

¶26

Thus, looking into the nature of attegations teveted agajnst the petitioners and their invotvement in the offence, I am not inctined to release the petitioners on anticipatory bait and accordingty, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bait is rejected. However, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the Court concerned within a period of ten days from today and fite an apptication for bait before the Court concerned after giving prior notice to the Pubtic prosecutor, in which event, the same can be disposed of in accordance with [aw.

¶27

Accerdingly, the Criminat petition^.is dismissed.

¶28

SD/.I.NAGA LAKSHMI ASSISTANT REGIST

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

The ll Additional Sessions^{Judge, Karimnagar,at Jagital.}

¶33

The Station House^{Officer, lbrahimpatnam Police Station, Jagital'}

¶34

Two CCs to the^{Public Prosecutor,High Courtfor the State of Telangana,at} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶35

One CC to Sri^{KondadiAjay Kumar, Advocate IOPUC]}

¶36

Two CD Copies

I\TIVK gbr

HIGH^COURT

DATED:^1210412021

_Fa]:-}
1i.. E SIA}{:
,?
o5 Z
O 23 APB 2021 .!CJ
*
,9
.! D,,.-i Ci.

¶41

ORDER

¶42

CRLP.No.1908^{of 2021}

¶43

DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL^PETITION

¶44

2bY
?)

Perumandla Narayana Goud and 2 Others v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Perumandla Narayana Goud and 2 Others 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

Poreddy Thirupathi Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Thatikanti Thirupathi Vs The State of Telangana

Joginipalli Kamalakar Rao Vs the State of A.P. and Another

S.Satyanarayana Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another

Smt. Simran Qureshi Vs the State of Telangana

Muppidi Sudhakar Rao Vs The State of Telangana