The High Court dismissed a criminal petition filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court rejected the plea, citing the gravity of the offences (murder and human remains destruction) and specific allegations of the petitioner's involvement.
Petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE JUSTIGE G SRI DEVI
CRIMINAL PETITION N O: 265 oF 2021
Between:
9ri.Gannaram Venkat Goud,S/o. Raj Gou 0., AS-99 38 years, Occ. Toddy Topper, R/o. Ka lwakunta Village, Niza mpet tr,4andal, Ir,/ed ak District.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No. 6
AND
The State of Telangana, Through police Station Ramayampet, Reo. bv public HrosecutorHrghcourtatHyderabad. ...RESPoNDENT/coMpLArNANT
Petition under section 43g of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the l\ilemorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased direct the S.H.o., Ramayampet police Station to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.6 on bail in the event of his arrest in crime No. 216 of 2020, Dt. 1411112020 of potice Station Ramayampet, Itrledak district, in the interest of justice.
This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of SripALLE SRIHARINATH ,Advocate for the petitioner and the Additional public prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent.
The Court made the following: ORDER
HONOURABLE JUSTICEG. SRI DEVI
CRI MINAL PETITIONNO.265 0F 2021
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition,under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(Cr.P.C.), is filed bythe petitioner/A-6, for grant of anticipatorybail in CrimeNo.2l6of 2O2O of P.S. Ramayampet,MedakDistrict,registeredfor the oflences punishable underSections302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
Heard the learned counselfor the petitioner lA-6,the learned Additional Public Prosecutorrepresentingthe respondent-State and perused the record,
In the FIR, it is inter alta statedthat the de factocomplainant gave a complaint on 14.11.2020 stating thaton 13.11'2020at about 13.0o hours, one Yadagiriwent to Bhagralaxmi's working place at Uttam Beedi Company andquarrelledwith her and after that he went to his elder sisterAnasuya'shouse and again quarrelled with his wife and on 14.1l.2O2O, he came to know that the said Yadagiri found dead inthe bushesin front of o1d water plant beside Ramayampet to Siddipet road. Hence, the FIR.
Learned counsel for the petitioner/A-6 would submit that the petitioner is innocent of the offence and he is noway concerned with the alleged offence. Thepetitioner/A-6 is a lawabiding citizen and is prepared to abide by any condition which this Court may deem fit to impose in case of granting anticipatory baii. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A-6.
2
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A-6.
As seen from the contents of the remand report, A- 1 to A-3, after commission of the crime have informed A-4 through phone and then A-4 went there and thereafter, A-1 to A-4 have shifted the dead body to another room, washed the blood stains, removed the blood stains clothes of the deceased and burnt them and thereafter, A-4 made a phone call to A-5 and A-5 toid that he know ,4-6 and A-6 agreed to help the accused. Hence, there are specific allegations against the petitioner/A-6 that he is involved in the abovementioned offences.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/A-6.
The Criminal Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. However, if the petitioner/A-6 surrenders before the competent Court within a period of fifteen days from today and applies for reguiar bail, the same shall be considered by the said Court, in accordance with 1aw.
Miscellaneous applications, if any,pending shallstand
closed.
Sd/.K.SAILESHI ASSISTANT BEGISTRAR G-o //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
To i.- fh" Vttt AdditionalDistrict and SessionsJudge at Medak' i. iii6 Siitio"l-iouseofficer, RamayampetPolice.station,Med?kDistrict' ;. i;;Ca; to PublicProsecutor,Hi-gh Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.(OUT) l. One CC to SriPalle Sriharinath,Advocate [OPUCI 5. Trvo CDCopies v
HIGH COURT
GSDJ
DATED:0210212021
ORDER
CRLP.No.265ot 2021
I
I He S TA r4i I
oo 20 tEB 2021 C,
* DF.SPA'T g.u
DISMISSING THE CRL.PETITION.
t")
a
td
I
3 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under Section 438 Cr.P.C. given the nature of the offence and allegations of abetment.
Whether the petitioner is involved in the offence of murder and cheating by arranging the displacement of the deceased body.
Whether the petition should be dismissed/rejected or allowed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Renu Gannaram Venkat Goud
The State of Telangana
G. Sr-devi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
