Allowed

T. Durgesh v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Apr 2021CRLP/2510/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justice G Sri Devi granted anticipatory bail to petitioner Durgesh in a police complaint case regarding excise violations. The court directed surrender within 15 days, appearance every Saturday, and execution of a personal bond with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to surrender within 15 days, weekly appearance before investigating officer until charge-sheet filing, and execution of bond with two sureties.

T. Durgesh Vs State of Telangana — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

[3rs8 |

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY. fHE ErGHl H DAY OF APRIt TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE'

¶4

:PRESENT:

¶5

THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G SRI DEVI

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2510 OF 2021

¶7

Bctween:

¶8

1'. Durgesh, S/o. D. Dasharath.

¶9

...,Petitioner/Accused

¶10

A-t)

¶11

State olTelangana, Through PS. Prohibition & Excise, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad Rep. By its Public Prosecutor High Court ofTelangana at Hyderabad.

¶12

...,Respondent/Complainant

¶13

Petition under Section 438 of-Cr.P.C, praying that⁽ the circumstances stated in tlre affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner/ accused on Anticipatory Bail in the event ofhis arrest in Crime No. 45 of20l6 on the file of PS, Prohibition & Excise. Dhoolpet. Hyderabad to abide by.,the condition or conditions that might be imposed by this Hon'ble Court.

¶14

The petition coming on for hearing. upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in supporl thereof and upon the arguments of Mr.Shaik Sabjan, Advocate for the Petitioner and Assistant Pr.rblic Prosecutor. for Respondent, the Court made the following.---

ORDT]R

I t,, I

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

¶19

CRIMINAL PETITION No.2510 ot 2021

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

This Crinrinal Petition, under S$n^{oa, of the Codeof Criminal} t' .^' Procedure,^'1973, is filed b'y the^{pftitioner/accused} seeking to^grant anticipatory bail in the event bf his arre'st in Cr.No.45 of^{20'16on the file of} Prohibition and Excise Police Station, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad, registered^for the offence punishable under Section 34(a) of A.P.Excise Act, 1968

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/accused, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State and^perused the

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioneri accused submits that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he never committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He fufiher submits that the allegations leveled against the petitioner are false and baseless and he has nothing to do with the alleged offences. He further submits that most part of the investigation is completed, except filing of the charge sheet and as such there is no chance of tamper:ing of prosecution witnesses by the petitioner. He also submits that the petitioner is a law abiding citizen and he has not involved in any criminal cases earlier to this crime and he is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court in the event of his enlargement on anticipatory bail.

¶24

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the anticipatory bail application of petitioner. He submits that the petitioner is absconding since the date of registration of the FlR, but charge sheet is not yet filed.

¶25

A perusal of the record would show that the offence is of the year 2016 and most part of the investigation is completed and FSL report has already been submitted, bul.:. it is stated that the charge sheet is not yet filed. Thus, looking into the nature of allegations leveled against the petitioneri accused and considering the facts and circumstances of the

¶26

i )

¶27

case, without adverting to the merits of the case, I am inclined tO grant

¶28

anticipatory bail to the petitioner on some conditions.

¶29

The Criminal Petition is accordipgly allowed and the petitioner/accused is granted anticipatory bail subject to the following terms and conditions:

¶30

(i) The petitioner/accused is directed to surrender before the Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise Police Station, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad, within a period of 15 days from the date of this order and on such surrender, the said Statbn House Officer shall release the petitioner/accused on Oait oi fris executing a personal bond to the tune of Rs.15,0O01 (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to his satisfaction.

¶31

(ii) On such release, the petitioner/accused shall appear before the lnvestigating Officer on every Saturday between 10.00 am to 2.00^pm, till completion of investigation and filing of charge Sheet.

¶32

(iii) Further, the petitioner/accused shall abide by the conditions

¶33

stipulated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶34

Miscellaneous applications, if any^pendingin this^{criminal petition,} shall stand closed.

¶35

S.I/-M.MANJULA ASSISTA^{NT REGIS}

¶36

¶37

,//TRUE COPY, SECTION^OFFICER

¶38

T⁽⁾

¶39

t. 2. J. 4. tr^{jrj#iltifr{:'!'i'i;##?'ruH^*'} 5. One^{sPare coPY}

¶40

¶41

HIGHCOURT (;SI).,I
DATED:08.0{.2021	-^.,/-.( i.\Y \|
cRL.P.NO.2s100F2021
ANTICIPATORYBAIL

T. Durgesh v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T. Durgesh 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

Kethavath Praveen Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

The State of A.P. Vs Ayyala Santosh Kumar

Smt.P.Satyavathi Vs D.John Vijay Kumar

V. Rakesh Kumar , Babloo Vs The State of Telangana

Shivaji,Kolikineni Shivaji Vs The State of Telangana

Sura Saraiah Vs The State of Telangana