Allowed

Bairi Laxmi Narsaiah v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC29 Jan 2025CRLP/767/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, accused of causing a villager's death by illegally connecting electric wires to kill wild pigs, sought bail after their sessions bail application was dismissed. The court granted regular bail, noting prolonged custody since 30.12.2024 and completion of material investigation, subject to bonds and weekly appearance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond of Rs.25,000 each with two sureties; weekly Monday appearances before SHO for eight weeks or till charge sheet; Section 437(3)/480(3) conditions apply.

Bairi Laxmi Narsaiah Vs The State of Telangana — Bail and Remand | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶2

CRIMINAL PETITION No.767 of 2025

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioners who are arrayed as accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.259 of 2024 of Ibrahimpatnam Police Station, Jagtial, on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

¶5

The brief facts of the case are that when the accused persons and the deceased went to hunt wild pigs at the outskirts of Rajeswaraopet village, the accused persons gave power supply by stealthily connecting to the electric wire to main line to kill the wild pigs. It is stated that the accused persons even after knowing that giving power supply to the electric wire is harmful to human beings also, if he comes into contact, the accused persons gave power supply to the electric wires. As a result, when the deceased walked towards the erected wires, the deceased met with electric shock and died on the spot. Hence, a case was registered vide Crime No.259 of 2024 before the Ibrahimpatnam Police, Jagtial District, for the offences punishable under Section 105 of the BNS and Section 136 of Electricity Act.

¶6

¶7

SKS,J Crl.P.No.767 of 2025

¶8

Heard Sri N.Krishna Sumanth, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners firstly submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they are no way concerned with the alleged offences. He secondly submitted that though there is no corroborative evidence, the petitioners were implicated in the case with false and fabricated allegations. He thirdly submitted that all the material witnesses were examined, and further detention of the petitioners is unnecessary. He fourthly submitted that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 30.12.2024, causing undue hardship to their families. He fifthly submitted that the petitioners are residents of Jagtial District, with movable and immovable properties, and are willing to furnish sureties as directed. He lastly submitted that previously, bail application of the petitioner, vide Crl.M.P.No.2 of 2025, was dismissed by the I Additional District and Sessions Judge at Jagtial, on 17.01.2025, without valid reasons and prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioners by allowing this criminal petition.

¶10

¶11

SKS,J Crl.P.No.767 of 2025

¶12

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that there are serious allegations against the petitioners and the investigation is not yet completed, therefore, granting bail to the petitioners, at this stage, does not arise. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

¶13

After considering submissions from both the parties and reviewing the record, since the petitioners are languishing in jail from 30.12.2024 and also material part of investigation is completed, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions:

¶14

i. The petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Metpalli.

¶15

ii. The petitioners shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) week or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

¶16

¶17

SKS,J Crl.P.No.767 of 2025

¶18

iii. The petitioners shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.(presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

¶19

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed.

¶20

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

closed.

K. SUJANA, J

Date: 29.01.2025 gms

SKS,J Crl.P.No.767 of 2025

¶26

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶27

CRIMINAL PETITION No.767 of 2025

¶28

Date: 29.01.2025

¶29

gms

Bairi Laxmi Narsaiah v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bairi Laxmi Narsaiah 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

Shaik Rizwan Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Kartik Saripalli Vs Mrs. Akshita Komireddi

Krishnaram Chowdary Vs The State of Telangana

Yelamalla Sathish Vs The State of Telangana

Sanapala Praveen @ Abhinav @ Chinna Vs The State of Telangana

Kunchela Nagaraj, Vs The State of Telangana