Dismissed

Mohd. Mahmood Khan v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Aug 2021CRLP/5725/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Hyderabad, Bench of Justice G. Sri Devi, examined an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. linked to offence under Section 306 IPC. The court dismissed the application, rejecting the plea for anticipatory bail due to the nature of allegations.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected and criminal petition dismissed; petitioner to surrender within 15 days.

Mohd. Mahmood Khan Vs The State of Telangana — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5725 OF 202'l

¶6

Between:

¶7

lr,/ohd lr,4ahmood Khan, S/o. Mr. Mohd. Ayoob Khan, Aged about 45^years. Occ Business, R/o. H.No. 19-2-271A, Phoolbagh, Jahanuma,^Hyderabad

¶8

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana, Through the Station House Officer, Shali^{Banda Police Station,} Rep.by its P.P High Court of Hyderabad, Hyderabad^District

¶11

...RESPONDENT/COM PLAI NANTS

¶12

Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C^praying thatⁱⁿ the^{circumstancesstated} in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,^{the High Court may be pleased} to grant the anticipatory bail to the Petitioner^{herein, and the Respondentmay be} directed to enlarge the Petitioner on bail, in^{the event of his arrest in crime no.25 of} 2020.PS Shalibanda in the above case, in the^{interestof justice.}

¶13

This Petition coming on for hearing,^{upon perusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing^{thearguments of} Sri. Pawan Kumar Agarwal, Advocate^{for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on} behalf of the Respondent.

¶14

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶15

I I

¶16

THE HONOURABLE^{JUSTICE G. SRI DI'VI} CRIMINAL PETITION^{NO.5725 0F 2021}

¶17

ORDER:

¶18

This Criminal Petition, under^{Section 438 ol the Code of} Criminal Procedure, L973^{(Cf'P.C.), is fil':d bythe} petitioner/Accused, for grant of anticipatory^{bail in tl-e event} of his arrest in connection^with Crime^{No'25of 2O2O on the} file of Shalibanda Police Station,^{Hyderabad, regil;teredfor the} offence punishable under Section^{306 I.P.C.}

¶19

petitioner/ Accused, the learned Assistant PubLc^Prosecutor reprcsenting tlte respondent-State and^{perusedtee record'}

¶20

Learned counsel for tlle petitioner^{rvould submit} that the petitioner is innocent of the^{offencea.lleged against} him; that ttre petitioner himseU has shifted^{thc deceased to} various hospitals; that the^{petitioner is} not^{responsiblefor the} death of the deceased; that in the alleged^{suicirlenote, there} is no reference about the petitioner; that^{l.aking undue} advantage of the death of the father of tlre^{conrplainant, the} complainant along u,ith his family members^{are trying to} harass anri blackmail the petitioner and ultirrately,^prayctl this Court to grant bail to the^petitioner.

¶21

Lean-red Assistant Public Prosecutor^representing t ht: r't:slronrlt)nt- Statc oltposed the bail application.

¶22

¶23

As seen from the contents of tl.e First Information Report and statement of wjtnesses, there are specific allegations against the petitioner that he got registered the Iand of the deceased illegally in his name arrd when the deceased asked the petitioner to return his land, the petitioner abetted and threatened the deceased. Thereupon, on 19.02.2020 the deceased gone to the house of the petitioner and requested the petitioner to hand over his lal<l, wher-r the petitioner refused to give the same, the deceaseri consumed poison and died in the hospital.

¶24

Thus, Iooking into the nature of allegations ievelled against the petitioner and his involvement in the commission of offence, I am not inctined to release the petitioner on anticipatory bail and accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

¶25

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner shall surrender before the Court concerned within a period of fifteen (15) da_vs from toda,, failurg rvhich the police sha-ll ta-ke coercive measur('s zrgainst the petitioner herein.

¶26

Miscellaneous appiications, if any, pending shall staxd

¶27

clo sed.

¶28

SDI. K. ONESIM ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I / ,TRUE COPY' ,/\v,/ SECTION OFFICER

¶29

To, 1. The XVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate^{at Nampally,Hyderabad} 2. The Station House Officer, Shahalibanda^{Police Station, Hyderabad} 3. One CC to Sri. Pawan Kumar^{Aqarwal, Advocate (OPUC)}

¶30

Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court^{for the State of Telangana Hyderabad} (our) 5. Two CD Copies 6. One Spare Copy

ks tp

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0210812021

)
f,
I
o 16 AUG?$ll >llFl)
a'//
<br>+ ,//
?,.
DEcDA-[C

ORDER

CRLP.No.5725 of 2021

DISMlSSING THE CRL.P

di,./ ot \2\ @

Mohd. Mahmood Khan v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Mahmood Khan 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

Smt. Katta Vanaja Rani, Vs Yedla Sudhakar Reddy

Mailaram Rajender Kumar Vs The State of Telanagana

Neelam Ravi Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Nampally Rameshwar Vs The State of Telangana

Siripuram Vinoda and another Vs The State of Telangana and another

M/S. Oswai Minerals Ltd., Secunderabad., Vs the State of Telangana,Rep Pp and 2 Otrs.