Dismissed

Gonela Ravinder, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Feb 2023CRLP/462/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Displaced bail application under Sections 439 and 482 Cr.P.C. Petitioner sought bail during daughter’s upcoming wedding, alleging rivalry over land/mining caused predecessor's murder. Bench found no change in circumstances and dismissed petition.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. dismissed; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stood closed.

Gonela Ravinder, Vs The State of Telangana — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO:462 OF 2023

¶5

Between:

¶6

Gonela Ravinder, S/o. Late G.Sammaiah, Aged 57 years, Occupation. Rice Miller, R/o. H.No. 2-1-13 7194, Gandhinagar, Narsampet, Mulugu District.

¶7

...PETITIONERYACCUSED.l

¶8

AND

¶9

The State of Telangana, Represented by Public Prosecutor High Court, at Hyderabad

¶10

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶11

Petition under Section 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioner / A-1 on bail in above said PRC No: 39 ot 2022, on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mulugu District, on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice.

¶12

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2023

¶13

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the clrcumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, 'ihe High Court may be pleased to receive the additional material papers i.e:, 1t 1 enotographs of engagement ceremony of petitioner's daughter, (2) inarriage wedding card of the daughter of the petitioner and (3) order in Crl. Petition No.8212 ot 20222 in the above Crl. Petition No. 462 of 2023 n the interest of^justice.

¶14

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lt/lemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri P. Srinivas Senior Counsel for Mrs E. R. SAVITHRI, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent.

¶15

'i : :., Court made the following: ORDER

¶16

ihr.

¶17

HONBLE DT. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMAI,ATHA

¶18

CRIMINAL PDTITION No.462 cf 2a23

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Heard Sri P. Srinivas, learned senior counsel, who argued on behalf of Smt E.R.Savithri, learned counsel on record for the petitioner, as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor who is representing the respondent-State. 2. This Criminal Petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is filed seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.1 in P.R.C.No.39 of 2022 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mulugu, on bail.

¶21

The case of the prosecution, as could be perceived through the contents of the charge sheet, is that the petitioner and accused Nos.2 and 3 in the light of the rivaly that exists between them and the deceased-Malla Reddv rega-rding landed property and red soil mining business, hired some persons to eliminate the deceased-Malla Reddy and accordingly, got the deceased-Malla Reddy killed brutally through those hired assailants.

¶22

Making his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the daughter of the petitioner is

¶23

Dr(SL.J Crl. P. No.162^oJ )023

¶24

going to get married on O9.O2.2O23 and therefore, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶25

Vehemently opposinEi the relief sought for, learned Additionai Public Prosecutor states that the^petitioner 1S moving series of applications one after the other and this is the fifth application in the said series. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also submits that the petitioner is^the prime accused and he had engaged persons to kill the deceased Malla Reddy and got him killed. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor further contends that all the pleas taken by the petitioner for getting released were negatived by this Court and finally, he has come up with a plea of marriage of his daughter. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also contends that the merits of the case and as to why the petitioner is not entitled for bail were discussed in the orders rendered by this Court in the previous bail applications. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor brought to the notice of this Court the contents of tl-re orders rendered in Criminal Petition Nos.BB3l of 2022, 10068 of 2022, 11144 of 2022 and 11844 of 2022.

¶26

Dr CSL. J Crl.P.n"o.1fi of 2023

¶27

¶28

¶29

6 . The allegations that are levelled against the petitioner are grave in nature. As per the version of the prosecution, the petitioner along with other accused has committed offences punishable under Sections 302, L2OB, lO9 artd 212 rlw 34 IPC.

¶30

Having considered the apprehension of the investigating agency that the petitioner would tamper with the evidence, the sensitiveness of the case and also the issues regarding safety and security of the witnesses cited, theearlier applications for grart of bail were dismissed. This Court does not find any change of circumstances.

¶31

B. Further, having considered the nature of the case, even the ground urged through the present application cannot be considered.

¶32

Resultantly, this Criminal Petition ls dismissed. 10" As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if illy, \ shall stand closed.

¶33

. ..1 SD/. MOHD SANAULLAH ANSARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ri SECTION OFFICER

¶34

To, 1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Mulugu District. 2. The Station House Officer, Mulugu Police Station, Mulugu District 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶35

One CC to Mrs E. R. SAVITHRI, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies MMK

HIGH COURT

Dr. CSL, J

DATED:.O210212023

ORDER

CRLP.No.462 ot 2023

1! \E STAIA
t
o I
0 2 rtB ?$8
;'
11 lil',/, -

¶43

DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION

¶44

Gonela Ravinder, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gonela Ravinder, 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.Saleh Bin Mohd.Jabri Vs the State of Telangana

Godugu Ravi Chandragiri Dheeraj , Goduru R.Dheeraj and 7 others Vs The State of Telangana

Sonu Bai , Shilpa Singh, Vs The State of Telangana

N.Prabhakar Reddy Vs State of Telangana

The State of Telangana Vs Mohd. Karim Pasha

G. Hemanth Reddy , Vema Reddy , Laddu Vs The State of Telangana