Allowed

B.Sudershan Goud and 2 Others v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC2 Feb 2021CRLP/263/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Petition under Section 438 CrPC, the High Court of Telangana granted anticipatory bail to petitioners accused of offences under Sections 427, 447, 506, and 420 IPC. Considering civil disputes, bail was granted subject to conditions including surrender and a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail directed; surrender within 15 days; personal bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties of equal amount.

B.Sudershan Goud and 2 Others Vs The State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR_THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERAB.{D

¶4

lllsrJ l

¶5

TUF'SDAY. THE SL]COND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ON;

¶6

:PRESENT:

¶7

THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI

¶8

CRIMINAL pETITIOI- NO: 263 OF 2021

¶9

Iletu cen:

¶10

L B.Sudershan Goud. S/o Allaiah.

¶11

Rarnaram [.axmi. W1o Late Rantaranr.

¶12

.langala Anuradha. Wo Late Ramaram.

¶13

Petitioners/Accused Nos. I to 3

¶14

,\I)

¶15

'fhe State ofTelangana, Rep. by its public prosecutor. High Court at Hyderabacl.

¶16

Respondent Sri Ramaram Keshav Kumar, S/o. Late Ramaram Mallesh, Rio H.No.43-300/1/2, Hanuman Nagar, RTC Colony, Malkajgiri, Medchal-Malkajgiri Districi.

¶17

Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶18

Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the petition and the grounds filed therein, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioners/accused No. l. to 3 on bail in the event of their anest in F.l.R. No.71 3 of 2020 on the llle of the Malkajgiri Police Station;

¶19

The petition coming on for hearing" upon^perusing the petition and the^{grounds filed} therein, and upon hearing the arguments^{o1'SriRapoiu Bhaskar.Advocatelbr the Petitioners, and} olthc Addl. Public Prosecutor. for^{the Respondent No.l.the Counmadethe following,}

¶20

HOITOURABLE^{JUSTICE G' SRI DEVI} ETITI^ONNo.26 3 OF² 02l CRI MI^NAII)

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

This Criminal^{Petition'under Section 438 of the Codeof} Criminal^{Procedure, 1973 (Cr'P C')' is filed by the petitioners/A-l} to A-3,^{for grant of anticipatorybail in Crime No'713 of 2020 of} P.S. Malkajgiri,^{Rachakonda District' registeredfor the offences} punishabie^{underSection s 427} '⁴⁴⁷ '^{506 and 42O of the Indian} Penal Code.

¶23

Heardthelearnedcounselforthepetitioners/A-1toA-3'the learned Additional^{Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-} State and Perused^{the record.}

¶24

In the FIR. it is inter^{alia statedthat the de} facto^complainant gave a complair:.t on O2.ll.2O2O^{statingthat on 22'06'2r)20'ooe} B.Sudershar-r Gcud^{is cleaningthe land with labourat ShafiNagar,} wherein the acr:used illegally^{trespassedinto the 1and,dug the} land and cheated and^{dishonestly induced deliverl'of property.} Hence, the complaint.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioners/A- 1 to A-3 would^submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and never committed any offence as allege d by the respondent-police. It is further submitted that the petitioners are law-abiding citizens and have nothing to do with the alleged offence. Further, they are ready to give sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of this Court to secure their presence on each and every date of hearing to face the trial and also ready to abide by the terms and conditions if any that may be imposed bv this Court for th.eir release. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petiti,rners/A- 1 to A-3.

¶26

t '\

¶27

¶28

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners/A- 1 to A-3.

¶29

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there are civil disputes between the parties, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners/A- 1 to A-3 on some conditions.

¶30

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the petitioners/A-1 to A-3 are directed to surrender before the Station House Officer, P.S. Malkajgiri, Rachakonda District, within a period of 15 days from the date of this order. On such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release the petitioners/A- 1 to A-3 on bai1, on their executing personal bond for a sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum each to his satisfaction. On such release, the petitioners/A- 1 to A-3 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section a38(2) Cr.P.C and co-operate with the investigating^officer in investigating the ca se.

¶31

Miscellaneous applications, if any,^pending shall stand closed.

¶32

SD/- T. KRISHNA^KU R ASSISTANT REG R

,TRUF:, COPY'

To,

SECTION^OFFICER

2.1.i. The il. i#;;r;" Sri Ramaram XVII^{Addl. Metropolitan Keshav} orr'""t,^{Kumar' rs Magistrate' J; ';1:'i;;;";' Ma-lt<ajgiri' Rachakonda Cyberabad'-Malkajgiri'ua]r91!' tuo District'H No 43-300/1/2'} Hanuman^{Nagar, RTCColony'iiut kajgi ri' M^edchal-Malkajgiri District'} ftftngana'^{at Hyderabad (OUT)} 4, Two CCs^{to Public Prosecutot'ii'gf1 6i'n} "f 5. O". CCi"^{srfnapolu Bhaskar' Advocate (OPUC)} 6. one^{SPare CoPY}

IGH^COTITT

GSD,J

DATE:2-02-2021

ORDER

CRL.P.^NO.2630F2021

PETITION^ALLO\ryIIT)

,,.
qr
CL

B.Sudershan Goud and 2 Others v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Sudershan Goud and 2 Others v. The State of Telangana and another

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

Belda Bharath Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Veenavanka Sai Teja Bannu Vs The State of T.S

Sri Sitanshu Agarwal Vs State of Telangana

Syed Akthar Vs State of Telangana

G. Srikanth Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. Gannaram Venkat Goud Vs The State of Telangana