Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Madduri Ramanjaneyulu, Prakasam ... vs State Of Ap., Rep Pp., on 22 March, 2021
Bench: Joymalya Bagchi, M.Ganga Rao
£3280]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVA
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MARCH, .%
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE :
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE JOYMALYA BAGC!
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.GANGA RAO
IA No. 1 OF 2021
IN
CRLA NO: 557 OF 2015
Between:
Madduri Ramanjaneyulu, S/o. Anjaiah, Aged about 30 years, R/o. Rajanagaram Village,
Talluru Mandal, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh.
Now in Central Prison, Rajahmandry, East Godavari District, Anshra Pradesh
...Petitioner
(Petitioner in CRLA 557 OF 2015
on the file of High Court)
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Amaravathi.
... Respondent
(Respondents in-do-)
Petition under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C praying. that in the circumstances stated
in the memorandum of grounds of criminal appeal, the High Court may be pleased to
release the petitioner on bail by suspending the sentence passed in S.C.No.370 of 2013
Date:04-05-2015 by the court of the Xlll Additional District and Sessions Judge at
Narasraopet, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh, pending disposal of CRLA No. 557 of
2015, on the file of the High Court.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the
memorandum of grounds of criminal appeal and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Dr
Challa Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate for the Apellant and Public Prosecutor for the
Respondent, the Court made the following.
ORDER:
"Petitioner is in custody for more than five (5) years. It is submitted that
there is no direct evidence to prove that he had murdered the deceased. It is
further submitted that circumstance No.5 as enumerated by the trial judge in
paragraph No.37 of the impugned judgment has not been proved beyond doubt.
He accordingly prays for bail.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail. He
submits that there was motive to commit the murder and ornaments belonging to
the deceased were recovered pursuant to the leading statement of the petitioner.
We have considered the evidence on record.
The case is based on circumstantial evidence. A vital circumstance,
namely, the deceased was seen with the petitioner on 18.07.2012 does not appear
to find support from the prosecution evidence. Impact of the aforesaid breach in
the chain of circumstances requires to be assessed during the hearing of the
appeal. An arguable case has been made out on behalf of the petitioner. In
addition thereto, he has been in custody for a considerable period of time. Under
such circumstances, we are inclined to suspend the sentence and enlarge the
petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a self
bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties
for like amount each to the satisfaction of the Junior Civil Judge, Vinukonda,
Guntur District, on condition that he shall appear before the learned Xiil
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, once in a month till
disposal of the Appeal. In the event he fails to do so, the learned Sessions Judge
shall submit a report before this Court, whereupon the bail so granted to him may
be cancelled, in accordance with law." -- _
- §d/-M.RameshBabu---
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITTRUE COPY//
Fo) SECTIO OFFICER .
To, --_
1. XIll Additional District and Sessions Judge at Narasraopet, Guntur District,
Andhra Pradesh
2. The Junior Civil Judge, Vinukonda, Guntur District. 7
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Rajahmundry.
4. One CC to Sri. Dr Challa Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]_--
5. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP [OUT] _--
6. Two spare copies
MM
J if
a
A
Je HIGH COURT
JBJ
MGRJ
DATED:22/03/2021
ORDER
IA No. 1 OF 2021
IN
CRLA NO: 557 OF 2015
INTERIM DIRECTION
