Akella Varun Raool vs The State Of Telangana

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 1634 Tel
Judgement Date : 14 June, 2021

Telangana High Court
Akella Varun Raool vs The State Of Telangana on 14 June, 2021
Bench: K.Lakshman
     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

           CRIMINAL PETITION No.4401 of 2021

ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent.

2. This application is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to alter/modify the conditions imposed in the order dt.11.05.2021 in Crl.MP.No.104 of 2021 in Crime No.221 of 2021 passed by the XVI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District.

3. Petitioners herein are the accused No.1 to 3 in Crime No.221 of 2021 pending on the file of Kushaiguda Police Station and the offences alleged against them are under Sections 406, 420, 464, 383, 506 of IPC.

4. Petitioners have filed the above petition Crl.MP.No.104 of 2021 seeking anticipatory bail.

5. The Court below, vide order dt.11.05.2021, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners herein on the following conditions:

"i) execution of self bond for Rs.20,000/- each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the XIX Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Cyberabad at Malkajgiri;
::2::
ii) deposit of Rs.5,00,000/- by each petitioner;
and
iii) petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Magistrate on or before 31.05.2021."

6. Feeling aggrieved by the condition of deposit of Rs.5,00,000/- by each petitioner, petitioners are before this Court.

7. According to the learned counsel for petitioners, the Court below is not having power to direct the petitioners to deposit the said huge amount as part of recovery and the said principle is also held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the recent judgment. According to him, in an anticipatory bail application, the Court has to consider the allegations against the petitioners therein and their conduct in cooperation with the investigating officer, etc., and instead of that, the Court below has imposed a condition of deposit of Rs.5 lakhs by each of the petitioners, which is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court.

8. The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions would submit that the Court below rightly imposed the conditions on the petitioners herein.

9. As stated above, petitioners herein filed the above Crl.MP.No.104 of 2021 in Crime No.221 of 2021 seeking ::3::

anticipatory bail, and the Court below has granted the anticipatory bail on certain conditions, which includes deposit of Rs.5 lakhs by each of the petitioners, but the Court below did not mention any reasons for imposition of the said condition.

10. In Dilip Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh and another 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that imposition of condition, to deposit an amount, by the Courts in an application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is virtually a direction in the nature of recovery in a civil suit, which is impermissible.

11. In view of the law above laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the order dt.11.05.2021 in Crl.MP.No.104 of 2021 in Crime No.221 of 2021 passed by the XVI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri, Ranga Reddy District, is modified and the condition imposed by the Court below of depositing Rs.5,00,000/- by each petitioner, alone, is quashed and the other conditions imposed in the order dt.11.05.2021 in Crl.MP.No.104 of 2021 remains unaltered.

12. With the above directions, this Criminal Petition is disposed of.

1 2021(2) SCC 779 ::4::

13. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_________________ K.LAKSHMAN, J 14th June, 2021.

gra