HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3473 of 2022
ORDER:
Heard Sri Koka Srinivasa Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor who is representing respondent No.1-State and Sri V.Raghunath, learned counsel who is representing respondent Nos.2 and 3.
2. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C seeking to enlarge the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.1 in S.C.No.131 of 2019 that is pending on the file of the Court of Special Sessions Judge for trial of cases under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act-cum-VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.
3. Making his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 2019 and on the ground that the petitioner may tamper the evidence and threaten the witnesses, he was not enlarged on bail and as of now, the entire trial proceedings are 2 Dr CSL, J Crl.P.No.3473 of 2022 completed and therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel also submits that there is no embargo upon enlargement of the accused on bail at any stage of trial proceedings. Learned counsel further submits that though the trial ought to have been completed much earlier, the prosecuting agency is dragging on the matter by filing one or other interlocutory applications. By stating so, learned counsel seeks for grant of bail.
4. Opposing the said submission, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 states that the petitioner has killed his wife and his six-month-old son and thereby, committed a heinous offence. Trial in the Sessions Case in question would be completed within a month and in case, the petitioner is now enlarged on bail, he cannot be traced thereafter and therefore, he is not entitled for the relief sought for.
5. The submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor is that 23 witnesses were examined till now and an application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is pending before the trial Court and the same is posted to 15.12.2022, 3 Dr CSL, J Crl.P.No.3473 of 2022 and on that day or within few days thereafter, the said application would be disposed of and within short time, judgment would be pronounced.
6. The facts of the case, as could be perceived through the contents of the charge sheet, are that the petitioner fell in love with the daughter of the defacto complainant, who belongs to Scheduled Caste. They both got married without the knowledge of the elders and started residing separately. The said girl pressurized the petitioner to inform about their relationship to his parents and family members, but the petitioner did not do so. The family members of the petitioner started pressurizing him to marry. On coming to know about the said fact, the wife of the petitioner increased the pressure on the petitioner to inform about their relationship to the elders. However, he did not do so. Later, the wife of the petitioner gave birth to a child. The parents of the girl also asked the petitioner to inform about their marriage to the elders. Subsequently, the family members of the petitioner, who got knowledge about the marriage, stated that the said girl, who belongs to Scheduled Caste, will not be allowed into 4 Dr CSL, J Crl.P.No.3473 of 2022 their home. The disputes continued. Finally, the petitioner thought of eliminating the said girl and the child so that he can marry again. On the date of incident, he took the victim girl and the child, killed them and then poured kerosene and burnt the dead bodies to screen the evidence.
7. The allegations thus levelled against the petitioner are grave in nature. Though bail is a right and jail is an exception, the said analogy cannot be applied for the accused to flee away from the clutches of justice. The apprehension expressed by the respondents is that in case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he will not be available in case he is convicted for serving the sentence and thereby, the entire exercise of the prosecution would be defeated.
8. Admittedly, as submitted by both the parties, the Sessions Case would be disposed of on merits within short time. At this juncture, having considered the gravity in the allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the request of the petitioner cannot be honoured. 5
Dr CSL, J Crl.P.No.3473 of 2022
9. Resultantly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to move a fresh application for grant of bail in case the Sessions Case in question is not disposed of by the trial Court within two months from the date of this order.
10. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA 13.12.2022 dr