Allowed

Gaddameedi Vinay v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Mar 2021CRLP/785/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of two criminal bail petitions filed by accused persons in a motor vehicle accident case registered at Police Station Shankarpalli. The High Court granted bail to Accused Nos. 2 and 3 under Sections 437 and 439 Cr.P.C. subject to personal bond and specific conditions including appearance before the Investigating Officer and prohibition from influencing witnesses or commi

What did the court decide?

The petitioners/accused Nos. 2 and 3 were granted bail on personal bonds of Rs. 1,00,000/- each with two sureties of similar amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Cheve

Gaddameedi Vinay Vs State of Telangana — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

I^3ls8I

¶2

t.!<-<< <4*r<.$*3rlr.-11

¶3

¶4

HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAI)

¶5

MONDAY, --r*o^{THE FIFTEENTHDAY OF MARCH} rHousAND^{AND TWENTY oNE}

¶6

:PRESENT:

¶7

THE HON'BLE^{JUSTICEG SRI DEVI}

¶8

zu PE ITI NN OS : 826 nd OF 2027

¶9

CRL.P.N0.826^{0F 2021}

¶10

Betrveen:

¶11

Erravelli^{Umesh, S/o. Pentaiah'}

¶12

....Petitioner/Accused^No'2

¶13

AND

¶14

StateofTelangana,ThroughSHo,shankarpailliPoliceStation,ChevellaDivision,Cyberabad n.p. ey i,;^{Prif f. Pror".u-to, High Court for the Stateof Telangana at Hyderabad}

¶15

....ResPondent/ComPlainant

¶16

PetitionunderSection43T&439ofCr'P'C'prayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin be pleased to^enlarge the grounds rhe petitioner/accused tiled^{in support no.2 olthe on'R"grlu, Criminal Petition, Bail in. crime No. the High 281 Court of} -m-ay^{2020on the irle of PS} irrurit..pari, Chevella^{Division.c"yberabadandreleasethe petitioner/accusedNo 2 on such} terms and conditions.

¶17

cRL.P.\0.785 0F²⁰²¹

¶18

Between:

¶19

Gaddameedi Vinay, S/o.Venkatesh

¶20

....Petitioner/Accused No.3

¶21

.{\ I)

¶22

State of Telangana,^'fhrough SHO, Shankarpailli Police Station, Chevella Division,^Cyberabad Rep. By its Public Prosecutor High Court for the State ofTelangana at Hyderabad

¶23

.,.,Respondent/Complainant

¶24

Petition under Section 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioneriaccused no.3 on Regular Bail in Crime No. 281 of 2020 on the file of PS Shankerpalli, Chevella Division, Cyberabad and release the petitioner/accused No.i on such terms and conditions.

¶25

These petitions coming on for hearing, upon perusirrg the Petitions and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the argurnents ol SRI.T.S.N.MURTHY Advocate fbr the Petitioner in both petitions and PLjBLIC PROSECTJTOR (TG) for Respondent in both petitions. the Court made the following.

¶26

oRI)I._li

¶27

¶28

I.HE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI c AL PETITIONNos.82 6 and,785 0F 202t

¶29

COMMoN ORI)ER:

¶30

Since the Crime and the facts involved in both these two petitions are one and the same, these two petitions are being disposed of by this common order.

¶31

These two Criminal petitions, under Sections 437 rlnd 439 of Cr.P.C., are filed by the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 respectively seeking to grant bail to them in Crime No.28 1 of 2O2O of Shankarpally Police Station, Chevella Division, Cyberabad, registered for the offence punishable under Section 304 part_ll I.p.C and Sections 1B 1 ancl 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

¶32

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/ Stato. Perused the record.

¶33

Learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 would submit that the only allegation against the petitioner/ accused No.2 is that he also consumed liquor, but, he has not driven the offending vehicle at the relevant point of time. The allegation insofar as petitioner/ accused No.3 is that he has not consumed the liquor, but while he was driving the subject vehicle, accused No.1 has taken the steering of the offending vehicle into his hands and this petitioner has not resisted accused No.l from taking steering from his hands knowing fully well that accused No.1 has consumed liquor, as a result of which accused No. t hit the offending vehicle to a divider of the road, due to which the vehicle turned turtle gone to the other side of the road and hit the deceased, who sustained bleeding injuries and

t_
t

died on the spot. But,^{learned counselwouldsubmit that knowingly} the petitioner/ accused No.3 has not^{given the steering of the} offending vehicle to accused No.l. He further^{submitsthat the} petitioners have never involved in any crime^prior to this occurrence. The petitioners are ready to abide by any condition imposed by^this Court.

¶38

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the bail applications.

¶39

Thus, looking into nature of allegations levelled against the petitioners / accused Nos.2 and 3 and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without adverting to the merits of the case, the petitioners/ accused Nos.2 and 3 can be granted bail.

¶40

Therefore, these Criminal Petitions are allowed and the petitioners /Accused Nos.2 and 3 are directed to be released on bail, subject to the following terms and conditions:

¶41

(i) The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 shall be reieased on bail on their executing personal bond for Rs.1,0O,00O/- (Rupees one lakh onlyleach with two sureties to the like amount each to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chevella, Ranga Reddy District.

¶42

(ii) The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 shall personally appear before the Investigating Officer on every lst and 3rd Saturday between 10:00 AM and 2:00 PM till completion of investigation and filing of charge sheet. Thereafter, they shall personally appear before the Court concerned on each date of hearing.

¶43

(iii) The petitioners/ Accused Nos.2 and 3 shall not influence the prosecution witnesses.

)

(iv) The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 and 3 shall not indulge in similar type of offences during pendency of this case. If petitioners are found to be involved in similar rype of oflences cluring pendency of this c.ase or if they violates any of the conditions imposed in this order, the bail granted to them shall automatically stand cancelled.

¶50

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶51

L-L ----r--

¶52

sD/^{. K. ONESIM} REGI

I t t'. R

//TRUE COPYII

SEC]'IO OFFICER

1 . The XII Additional Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Vikarabad.

¶58

The Judicial First Class Magistrate at Chevella, Ranga Reddy District.

¶59

The Superintendent, Central Prison. Chenchalguda, Hyderabad.

¶60

The Station Flouse Officer, Shankarpally Police Station, Chevella Divison. Cyberabad

¶61

One CC to SRI.T.S.N.MURTHY Advocate [OPUC]

¶62

Two CCs to the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (TG), Hieh Court at Hyderabad (OU'f )

¶63

Two spare copies.

HI(;II COIIRT

GSD.,l

DATED : 15.03.2021

CRL.P.NOS.826 AND 785 OF 2O2I

¶68

ll.{IL

¶69

-
<br>lr
Ll 5 MfirB:i
'/

¶70

Gaddameedi Vinay v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaddameedi Vinay 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

T. Appala Swamy Vs The State of Telangana

Dr. Matta Jyothirmai, Vs The State of Telangana

Birudu Ramulu Vs Keesara Susheela

Bontha Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Bontha Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Erravelli Umesh Vs State of Telangana