1
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No.: Crl. A. No. 829 of 2017
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.
ORDER
No DATE
01 31.10.2022 CPK, J & BVLNC, J
I.A. No. 1 of 2022
In
Crl. A. No. 829 of 2017
The Petitioner, who is the Appellant in the above appeal, filed the present application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C., seeking bail, pending disposal of the Criminal Appeal. The Petitioner/Accused was tried in Sessions Case No. 455 of 2015 on the file of III Additional Sessions Judge [FTC], Anantapuram, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 302 I.P.C. The learned Sessions Judge while acquitting the Petitioner/Accused for the offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.PC., convicted him for the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C. and accordingly, sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for 2 life and also to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year.
The present application seeking bail came to be filed stating that, the Petitioner has completed 05 years of actual sentence after filing of the Appeal before Hon'ble Court and in view of the Judgment in Batchu Rangarao & others v. State of A.P.1 he would be entitled for bail.
The fact that Petitioner/Accused has completed 05 years of actual sentence after preferring the appeal is not in dispute. The Division Bench of this court in Batchu Rangarao & others supra, held as under:
"On considering their valuable suggestions and after a thorough evaluation of the relevant factors, we are inclined to indicate broad criteria on which the applications for grant of bail pending the Criminal Appeals filed against the conviction for the offences, including the one under Section-302 IPC, and sentencing of the appellants to life among other allied sentences, are to be considered. Accordingly, we evolve the following criteria:
(1) A person who is convicted for life and whose appeal is pending before this Court is entitled to apply for bail after he has undergone a minimum of five years imprisonment following his conviction;1
[2016 (3) ALT (Crl.) 505 (DB) (A.P). 3 (2) Grant of bail in favour of persons falling in (1) supra shall be subject to his good conduct in the jail, as reported by the respective Jail Superintendents;
(3) In the following categories of cases, the convicts will not be entitled to be released on bail, despite their satisfying the criteria in (1) and (2) supra:
The offences relating to rape coupled with murder of minor children dacoity, murder for gain, kidnapping for ransom, killing of the public servants, the offences falling under the National Security Act and the offences pertaining to narcotic drugs.
(4) While granting bail, the two following conditions apart from usual conditions have to be imposed, viz., (1) the appellants on bail must be present before the Court at the time of hearing of the Criminal Appeals; and (2) they must report in the respective Police Stations once in a month during the bail period.
This broad criteria cannot be understood as invariable principles and the Bench hearing the bail applications may exercise its discretion either for granting or rejecting the bail based on the facts of each case. Needless to observe that grant of bail based on these principles shall, however, be subject to the provisions of Section-389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure."
The fact that the case of the Petitioner do not fall within any of the exceptions laid down in the said Judgment, is also not in dispute. It is not a case where the petitioner is alleged to have committed offence relating to rape coupled with murder of minor children dacoity, murder for gain, kidnapping for ransom etc. 4 It is to be noted that, though, the Petitioner was placed at Semi Open Prison, Kadapa, but the column 'Punishment' indicate that, there was forfeiture of remission for five [05] days and stoppage of interviews for a period of two [02] months, for the reason that, mutton pieces cut at the General Kitchen was fed to cats. This, in our view, cannot be taken as a circumstance to deny the ratio laid down in Batchu Rangarao & others supra, more so, having regard to the nature of offence committed by him.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of learned Counsel for the parties and since the case of the petitioner falls within the parameters laid down in Batchu Rangarao & others supra and as the judgment of the Division Bench attained finality, the Petitioner shall be released on bail on certain terms and conditions.
5
Accordingly, the interlocutory application is allowed and the execution of sentence of imprisonment imposed against the Petitioner/Accused in S.C. No. 455 of 2015, dated 01.02.2017, on the file of III Additional Sessions Judge, Anantapuram, is suspended, pending disposal of the appeal and ordered that the Petitioner/Accused shall be enlarged on bail on him executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs., 15,000/- [Rs. Fifteen Thousand Only] with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Ananthapuramu, Ananthapuramu District.
I.A. is ordered, accordingly.
_______ CPK, J __________ BVLNC, J SM