Dismissed

Reballe Sheshubabu,Narsimha Swamy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC23 Aug 2021CRLP/5058/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the petitioners prayer for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C regarding an accused ofabetf section 306 IPC. The court noted the FIR alleged domestic abuse leading to suicide and found the petitioners not inclined for relief. Petitioners directed to surrender within 15 days for regular bail consideration.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected. Petitioners to surrender within fifteen days for regular bail consideration.

Reballe Sheshubabu,Narsimha Swamy Vs The… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

IVONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITIO NO: 5058 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

Reballe Sheshubabu @ Narsimha Swamy, S/o. Venkata Swamy, age 60 years, Occ. Nil, R/o. Joopaka Village Huzurabad Mandal, Karimnagar District.

¶9

Reballe Sunny @ Sumanth, S/o. Narsimha Swamy, age 24 years, Occ. Student, R/o. Joopaka Village Huzurabad Mandal, Karimnagar District.

¶10

Reballe Swetha, W/o. Ravi, age 33 years, Occ. House-Hold, Fl/o. Joopaka Village Huzurabad ltlandal, Karimnagar District.

¶11

...Petitioner/A 2 to A4

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶14

... Responde nUCom plainant

¶15

Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lt/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioners lA2 lo A4 on bail in the event of arrest of their in Crime No. 09 of 2021 on the file of Police Station Kazipet.

¶16

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the l,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V. Srikantha Rao, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶17

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶18

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE^{G. SRI DI'VI}

¶19

CRIMINAL PETITION No'5O58^{of 2O21}

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

This Crirninal Pelition, under^{Section 438 of the Codeof} Criminal Procedure 1973, is filed^{by the petitioncrslA-2Lo A-4} seeking to grant anticipatory bail^{in the event of their arrest in} connection with Crime No.O9 of^{2027 of Kazipet PoliceStation,} Warangal District, which^{was registeredfor the offe:rcepunishable} under Section 306 r/w.34^{of IPC.}

¶22

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/A-2 lo A-4, learned Additional Put,lic^Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State^{and perusedthe record.}

¶23

As seen from the contents^{of the FIR itself, there are specific} allegations against the^{petitionerslA-2 lo A-4 that on 16.01.2021,} u,hen the deceased had gone to her^{house whereac:used No.1 was} residing, she did not find him there^{in the houseand she hadgone} to the house of her in-laws where^{her in-laws abus,ed her in lilthy} Ianguage which was informed^{by her to her parents by crying and} therealtcr, she had^gone to her^{room and had taden the drastic} step ol committing surcicle and^{succumbed to thesa me.}

¶24

Learned counsel for the^{petitionersf A-2 to A-4 would submit} that the petitioners/A-2 to A-4 never^{abused the deceasedat any} point of time, that the deceased never resided with^{them and that} since the date of marriage, the accused^No. 1^{and deceasedare} living separately at Hanamkonda and that the mother^{of the}

¶25

¶26

deccased rvith an evil motive, lodged a lalsc complaint agairrst thr: pctitioners / A- 2 to A-4.

¶27

Learncd Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioners/A-2 to A'.4

¶28

Thus, looking into the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioners/A-2 to A-4, I am not inclined to release the petitioners/A-2 to A-4 on anticipatory bail and accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners/A-2 to A-4 is rejected.

¶29

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the petitioners/A-2 to A-4 are directed to surrender before the Court concerned within fifteen (15) days from today and on their such surrender and applying for regular bail, their bail application shall be considered as expcditiously as possible in accordance with la ll'.

¶30

Miscellaneous petitions pcnding, iI any. in this Crimirral

¶31

Petition, shall stand closed.

¶32

//TRUE COPY'

¶33

SD/.N.CHANDRA^{SEKHAR RAO} ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR :ILI

¶34

SECTION OFFICER

¶35

To, 1 The Principal Judicial^{First Class Magistrate at Warangal District'} 2 rn; stutioi^{r_r"use officer, Kazipet policestation, warangal District.} o i;; cc; t" the^{Additional punticpro.ecrtor, Highcourt for the State of} Telangana at^HYderabad [OUT] 4. on" ic to Sri^{V. SrikanthiRao, AdvocatetoPUCl} Two CD CoPies o. One Spare^CoPY MMK gbr

¶36

HIGH COURT

¶37

DATED: 2310812021

¶38

Y S I A
1:
z
cc 31 AUC2021
*
tI

¶39

ORDER

¶40

CRLP.No.5058 of 2021

¶41

DISMISS!NG THE CRIMINAL PETITION

¶42

¶43

.-!

Reballe Sheshubabu,Narsimha Swamy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reballe Sheshubabu,Narsimha Swamy 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

Kiran Tidke Vs State of Telangana

Mohammed Khadar Vs The State of Telangana

S. Narasimha Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Adunuri Venakata Lakshmi and 3 others Vs The State of T.S. and another

Lakkineni Surender Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Thirudi Mahesh Vs The State of Telangana