Allowed

Kalal Nagarjuna Goud v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Feb 2021CRLP/832/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused charged with theft of electrical energy under Section 135(1)(b) of the Electricity Act, 2003, considering the payment of the estimated loss amount.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender within 15 days to release on personal bond of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties of Rs. 5,000 each.

Kalal Nagarjuna Goud Vs The State of Telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

I3rs8 |

¶3

HICH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD ..,

¶4

TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE-

¶5

:PRESENT:

¶6

THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G SRI DEVI

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 832 OF 2021 /

¶8

Betw€en:

¶9

Kalal Nagarjuna Goud, S/o Balappa

¶10

,,..Petitioner/Accused'-

¶11

AND

¶12

The State ofTelangana, Rep., its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana AT Hyderabad

¶13

.,,.Respondent/Complainant

¶14

Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the glounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in event of arrest in FIR.No.5093 of 2020. dated 15-12-2020 ofPolice A.P.T.S. Policc Station. Mahabubnagar District.; ,

¶15

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit f.iled in supporl thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI.G.RAJESHWAR RAO Advocate lor the Petitioncr and Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent. the Courl pde the follou ing.

oRlxtR

rr'

// {/,/

HOIITOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

¶21

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.832 OF 2O2¹

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

This Crimirral Petition, under Section 438 of the^{(lode ol} Criminal Procerlure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), is filed by^the petitioner/ accuse,1, for grant of anticipeitory bail in Crime No.5093 of 2O2O of P.S. I'PTS, Mahabubnagar District,^registered for^the offence punishab.e under Section 135(1)(b) of the Electricity^Act, 2003.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/ accused, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondentState and perusec[ the record.

¶25

In the FIR, ..t is inter alia stated that the de facto complainant gave a complaint on 15.12.2020 stating that on the same day at about 16.25 hours during routine inspection, he along with staff inspected the pre mises of the petitioner/ accused and found that the load meter is not functioning as the consumer has bl,passed the meter ',r,ith c,ishonest intention and deliberately indulged in theft of energlriolating the GTCS of TSSPDCL and the loss sustained is Rs. I t,7 lll-.

¶26

Learned counsel lor the petitioner/ accused would submit that the petitione: is an innocent person and never committed any offence as alleged by the respondent-police. lt is further submitted that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen and has nothing to do with the alleged offence. Further, he-is ready to give sr.rfficient sureties to the satisfaction of this Court to secure his presence on each and every date of hearing to face the trial and also ready to abide by the terrr,s and conditions if any that may be imposed by

¶27

¶28

this Court for his release. Further, it is represented that the provisionaily estimated amount of Rs.1I,71ll- has already been paid by the petitioner/ accused. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/ accused.

¶29

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/ accused.

¶30

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and as the provisionally estimated amount of Rs. 11,7111- has already been paid by the petitioner/accused, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/ accused on some conditions.

¶31

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the petitioner/ accused is directed to surrender before the Station House Officer, P.S. APIS, Mahabubnagar District, within a period of 15 days from the date ol this order. On such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release the petitioner/ accused on bail, on his executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to his satisfaction. On such release, the petitioner/accused shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C and co-operate with the investigating officer in investigating the case.

¶32

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.

't' o

//TRUE^COPY//

e.rrr- M.RAMA:'IA^i(RtstlH-4" ii.,^{i ii o *',*t-o'' t' *on} so, rffi-t'FFlct.R

¶37

:x";,'

¶38

ifi.tr$$$$t$in#ffi,i*''rtrs:;'fr

HIGH COURT

GSD.J

DATED; 16.02.2021

CRL.P.NO.832 0F²⁰²¹

ANTICIPATORY^BAIL

rttll,t

Kalal Nagarjuna Goud v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalal Nagarjuna Goud 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

Mr.Joel Johnson Vs The State of Telangana

Bandi Ravi Kiran Vs The State of Telangana

Bandi Kondaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Cherukuri Harsha Vardhan Vs The State of Telangana

Gourarapu Thirupathamma, And Another Vs The State of Telangana

D. S. Yadagiri , Dappu Sayanna Yadagiri Vs The State of Telangana