Allowed

Polam Nagaraju , Nagaraju v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Mar 2021CRLP/963/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana allowed a criminal petition filed by two accused persons seeking bail. The court granted the application and directed their release on bail subject to specific conditions regarding bonds, appearance, and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail on Rs. 15,000 each with two sureties for like sums, subject to six conditions including appearance before investigators and personal appearance in court.

Polam Nagaraju , Nagaraju Vs State of Telangana — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

[^31s8 ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

:PRESENT:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G SRI DEVI

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 963 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

Polam Nagaraju @ Nagaraju, S/o P. Tirpathiah,.

¶9

Chinthapally Ramesh @ Sri Ramulu, S/o C. Pedda Anjiah,

¶10

Petitioners/Accused No. I & 10

¶11

AND

¶12

State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor P.S. Charakonda Nagarkurnool Dist ln the High Court of Telangana.

¶13

RespondenURespondent

¶14

Parwatham Sangaiah, S/o Srisailam, Age 35 yrs, Occ- Mason, R/o Turkalpally (V), Charakonda Mandal, Nagarkurnool Dist, Telangana

¶15

RespondenUDefacto Complainant

¶16

Petition under Sections 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 grant bail to the Petitioners and direct the Police P.S. Charakonda Nagarkurnool District to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in the Crime No. 11 of 2021;

¶17

The petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Petition and the^grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI^NARAPARAJU AVANEESH Advocate for the Petitioners and ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR^for the Respondent 1, the Court made the following.

¶18

ORDER:

¶19

HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.963 OF 2O2I

¶20

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

The petitioners/A-9 and A-10 filed the present Crimina1 Petition under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of^(lriminal Procedure seeking to grant bail to them in Crime No.ll of 2O2l of P.S. Charakonda, Nagarkurnool District, rvhich was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 4,18, 427 , 323, 5O4, 506, 295 and 295-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(Va) of the SC & ST (PoA) Amendment Act, 2015.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners/A-9 and A- 10, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State and perused the record.

¶24

The allegation against the petitioners/A-9 and A-10 is that on O1.O2.2O21 l:he de facto complainant lodged a complaint stating that on 31.O1.2021 the petitioners/A-9 and A-10 along with some others trespassed into his brother's house, broke the piano and mike set, assaulted him and damaged the chi rs and when his sister-in-law intervened, they thrown the chairs on her stomach and ftrrther abused them in filthy language and threatened to ki1l them and picked up the Bible and burned it on the road and r,l'arned thre de facto complainant il he informs the incident to police, thev would ki1l him.

¶25

¶26

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed to Srant bail to the petitioners/A-9 and A-10.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioners/A-9 and A-10 submits that the petitioners have not committed any offence as aileged by the prosecution and they are falsely implicated in the above case. The petitioners/A-9 and A-10 are in custody slnce O3.O2.2O21. Hence, it is prayed to consider the petitioners' application for bail.

¶28

Lookingtinto the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners/A-9 and A- 10.

¶29

The Criminal Petition is a,llou,ed and the petitioners/A-9 and A- 10 shall be released on bail on the following terms and conditions:

¶30

(i) That the petitioners/A-9 and A-10 shall execute a personal bond for Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Kalwakurthy;

¶31

(ii) That the petitioners/A-9 and A-10 shall appear before the investigating authorities on every third Saturday between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm till conclusion of investigation and submission of final report;

¶32

(iii) That the petitioners/A-9 and A-10 shall not indulge in similar type of activities in future and if it is found that they are indulged in similar type of activities in future, the liberty granted to them shall automatically stand cancelled and they. -wou1d be taken into custody forthwith.

¶33

¶34

¶35

(iv) that the petitioners/A-9 and A- 1O shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶36

(v) that the petitioners/A-9 and A-10 shall co-operate with the investigating agency.

¶37

(vi) that the petitioners/A-9 and A-10 shall not misuse the liberty granted to them.

¶38

(vii) that the petitioners/A-9 and A-10 shall appear before the Court concerned personally on each date of hearing ti1l conclusion of tria1.

¶39

Miscellaneous applications pehding, if any, sha1l stand

closed

//TRUE COPY//

I
"<br>

i3!,hxtflln,.,o x!:"

SEETION^OFFICER

To,

.1 . The Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kalwakurthy,^{MahabubnagarDistrict'} Z. f n" Supetintendent,^{District Jail' Mahabubnagar'.} 3. The Station^{Hou.e ottlcei]Cr'uilono"p-oritu.s11tio1' Nagaktrrnool District} ; o;;a-.c i;^{snr r'rnnepnnAJuAVANEESHAdv-ocateloPllc]} 5. Two CCs^{to the PUBLIC iiOsfCufOn} '^{HighCourt for the State of} Telangana,^{HYderabad (OUT)}

¶49

One spare^coPY

HIGH COURT

GSD]

DATED: 04.03.202n

ORDER

CRLP. NO: 963 ol 2O2L

¶56

?s
ei

¶57

CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED

Polam Nagaraju , Nagaraju v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Polam Nagaraju , Nagaraju 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

Manchala Sampath Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

The State of a.P., Vs Lingala Mallesh Yadav

Mettupally Santhosh Reddy , Mastan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Chinthapalli Kiran Vs State of Telangana

E.Ramesh Vs the State of a.P., Rep. by P.P.

Jungula Narsa Goud, And Another Vs The State of Telangana