Gandivalasa Ram Prasad vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 85 AP

[ 3240 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY,
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

'PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

 

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6213 OF 2020

Between:
Gandivalasa Ram Prasad, S/o Late Surya Narayana, Kapu by caste, aged about 70
years, R/o D.No.1-69, Mathala Village, Kotturu Mandal, Srikakulam District within the
limits of Kotturu Police Station.
...Petitioner/Accused No.1
AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra
Pradesh at Amaravathi
.. Respondent

Petition under Section 438 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 herein on Anticipatory Bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.
360 of 2020 on the file of the Kothuru Police Station, Srikakulam District.

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the
memorandum of grounds of criminal petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri
P Durga Prasad, Advocate for the Petitioner and Public Prosecutor for the Respondent,
the Court made the following.

ORDER:

"This is an application filed seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.360 of 2020 of Kothuru Police Station, Srikakulam District, wherein the petitioner/accused alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(1)(u) of the SCs & STs (POA) Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the entire complaint except stating that the allegations are made in the name of caste, there are no specific allegations for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1){s) and 3(1)(u) of the SCs & STs (POA) Act. Learned counsel further submits that he uploaded certain judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court. -

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the complaint is not an encyclopedia and it need not contain ail the facts and the abuse made by the petitioner in the name of caste is clearly culled out in 161 statements and he relied on the judgment of the Karnataka High Court and submits that mere taking the name of caste itself is sufficient to attract the offence under the SCs & STs (POA)Act.

Both the learned counsel wanted to upload those judgments. Hence, prima facie this Court is not convinced with the submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and further the allegations in the comiaint

prima facie do not attract the provisions of the SCs & STs (POA)Act.

In view of the above, Police are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner for a period of two (2) weeks.

Post the matter on 19.01.2021.

Both the learned counsel shall upload their judgments."

Sd/-K.JaganMohan DEPUTY REGISTR ITRUE COPY! SECTION OFFICER For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To,

4. The Station House Officer, Kothuru Police Station, Srikakulam District. 2 One CC to Sri. P.Durga Prasad, Advocate [OPUC] 3 Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP [OUT] 4, One spare copy MM

HIGH COURT

LK,J

DATED:07/01/2021

NOTE: POST ON 19-01-2021

ORDER

CRLP.No.6213 of 2020

; INTERIM DIRECTION

12 JAN 2021