Yalamanchili Phaneendra ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4946 AP

           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

               CRIMINAL PETITION No.5608 of 2022

ORDER:-


      This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( for short, 'Cr.P.C.'), seeking anticipatory

bail, by the petitioners/A-2, A-5, A-6, A-8 to A-19, A-21, A-22, A-24,

A-25, A-28 to A-31, A-33 to A-37, A-41, A-43 and A-44 in Cr.No.118

of 2021 of Amaravathi Police Station, Guntur District, registered for

the offence punishable under Sections 307, 324, 506, 143, 144, 148

r/w. 149     of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s),

3(2)(v),   3(2)(va)   of   Scheduled   Caste   and   Schedule   Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.


      2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, there were

two groups in YSR Congress Party in Narukullapadu Village of

Amaravathi Mandal and the de facto complainant belongs to the

group led by Nalleboina Srinivasa Rao, whereas the accused belongs

to the group led by Ravela Sambasiva Rao(A-1). The said Ravela

Sambasiva Rao (A-1) bore grudge on the group led by Nalliboina

Srinivasa Rao on the ground that they did not extend their support

to him in the recent panchayat elections and he along with his group

was waiting for an opportunity to wreck vengeance. On 03.04.2021,

there was swearing in ceremony of Sarpanch and Vice Sarpanch at

Panchayat office and A-1 has sworn as Sarpanch and Nalliboyina

Srinivasa Rao has sworn as Vice Sarpanch of the village on behalf of

YSR Congress Party. Both the groups have arranged meals

separately for their followers. When the de facto complainant and
                                   2


his group after having their meal were going to their houses, the

said Ravela Sambasiva Rao (A-1) along with 50 persons, with an

intention to kill, attacked the de facto complainant and others

arming with stones, sticks, Axes and rods abusing them touching

their caste and caused injuries to the de facto complainant and five

(05) others. Basing on the complaint given by the de facto

complainant the crime was registered against the petitioners and

others.

      3. Heard Sri Javvaji Sarath Chandra, learned counsel for the

petitioners and Sri Soora Venkata Sainath, learned Special Assistant

Public Prosecutor for 1st respondent-State. The learned Special

Assistant Government Pleader has placed on record the notice

served on the 2nd respondent-de facto complainant in compliance of

the requirement under Section 15 A (3)(5) of the Scheduled Castes

and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. However,

he did not choose to enter his appearance.

4. Sri Javvaji Sarath Chandra, learned counsel for the

petitioners, would submit that the petitioners are innocent of the

offence and they were falsely implicated in this case and in fact, the

de facto complainant and his group were the aggressors and they

attacked the petitioners and their group and in that connection a

case in Cr.No.120 of 2021 of Amaravathi Police Station has been

registered under Section 324 r/w. 149 of Indian Penal Code, though

ingredients under Section 307 IPC are very much present, against

the prosecution party herein and as a counter blast, the de facto

complainant and his group weaving out a false story of assault on

them, got registered a false case for the offence under Section 307

IPC and sections of S.Cs.&S.Ts.(PoA).

The learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit

that the petitioner nos.3,11,12,26 to 31 belong to S.C.community

and the provisions of S.Cs.&S.Ts.(PoA) Act do not attract against

them. He placed on record their caste certificates.

The learned counsel would further submit that a glance at the

FIR would make it clear that this case is an outcome of differences

in the same political party and the allegations levelled against the

petitioners are bald and omnibus in nature and they do not attract

any offence much less the offences alleged against the petitioners.

The learned counsel would further submit that the co-accused

A1, A3, A4, A7, A20, A26, A27, A32, A38, A39, A40 and A42 have

been granted regular bail by the learned IV Additional Sessions

Judge, Guntur in Crl.M.P.No.647 of 2021 on 12.04.2021.

The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioners

are agriculturists and they are the sole bread winners of their

respective family and the agricultural season has set in, and if the

petitioners were arrested their families would deprive of their

livelihood and they would be put to starvation.

The learned counsel would further submit that substantial part

of the investigation has already been completed as is evident from

the observations made by the learned IV Additional Sessions Judge,

Guntur while granting bail to the co-accused.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit

that the alleged injured persons have been discharged from the

hospital and they are hale and healthy and attending to their day to

day activities.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit

that the petitioners are law abiding citizens and they hail from

agricultural families, they would abide by the conditions imposed by

this Court, they would undertake that they would neither tamper

with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the process of

investigation and that they would make themselves available to the

Investigating Officer and cooperate for investigation.

On the above contentions, the learned counsel for the

petitioners sought pre arrest bail to the petitioners and prayed to

allow the petition.

5. On the other hand, Sri Venkata Sainath Soora, learned

Special Assistant Public Prosecutor, would submit that a petition

seeking pre arrest bail is not maintainable and the same is contrary

Section 18 of the S.Cs.&S.Ts.(PoA) Act and hence the instant

petition is liable to be dismissed on that ground alone.

The learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor would further

submit that the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners

regarding nature of allegations made against the petitioners and

others accused being bald and omnibus, is false and a perusal of the

161 Cr.P.C. statement of the de facto complainant/ L.W.1 would

show that specific overt acts have been attributed against each

accused.

The learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor would further

submit that the investigation is in process and if the petitioners were

granted pre arrest bail, they would tamper the prosecution evidence

and they would not cooperate with the process of investigation.

On the above contentions, the learned Special Assistant Public

Prosecutor opposed pre arrest bail to the petitioners and prayed to

dismiss this petition.

6. In reply to the contention of the learned Special Assistant

Public Prosecutor in relation to maintainability of pre arrest bail

application, the learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance

on Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India 1 and has drawn

attention of this Court to Para-11 of the said judgment, which is

extracted hereunder:

"11. Concerning the applicability of provisions of Section 438 CrPC, it shall not apply to the cases under the 1989 Act. However, if the complaint does not make out a prima facie case for applicability of the provisions of the 1989 Act, the bar created by Sections 18 and 18-A(i) shall not apply. We have clarified this aspect while deciding the review petitions.."

and contended that the FIR in this case does not show prima facie

case against the petitioners for applicability of the provisions of the

S.Cs.&S.Ts.(PoA) Act and some of the petitioners belong to

S.C.community, hence, the bar created by Sections 18 and 18-A(i)

of the Act does not apply to the present facts of the case and hence

this application is maintainable.

. (2020) 4 SCC 727

7. Perused the record. The First Information Report discloses

that the incident is outcome of previous grudges among two warring

groups belong to same political party. S.C.community people have

become part of both the groups, as is evident from the caste

certificates of some of the petitioners placed on record. Thus, it is

hard to believe that the alleged attack is meant either to beat or

insult the persons belong to S.C.community. Thus, as rightly

contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the FIR does

not make out a prima facie case for applicability of the provisions of

S.Cs.&S.Ts.(PoA) Act and thus, this application filed for grant of pre

arrest bail is maintainable in light of the decision referred to supra.

The record further discloses that Crime no. 120 of 2021 has

been registered against the prosecution party herein based on the

report given by one of the accused in this case for the offence

punishable under Section 324 of I.P.C. Some of the co-accused in

this case have been granted regular bail by the learned IV Additional

Sessions Judge, Guntur on 12.04.2021 in Crl.M.P.No.647 of 2021.

The observations made by the learned Judge in the said order would

go to show that substantial part of the investigation is completed

even by the time of grant of bail way back on 12.04.2021. The

alleged injured persons have been discharged from the hospital and

they are hale and healthy, as confirmed by the learned Special

Assistant Public Prosecutor.

8. In view of the above, taking into consideration the fact that

substantial part of the investigation is completed and some of the

co-accused have been granted regular bail by the Sessions

Court and that some of the petitioners/ accused belong to

S.C.community and there is counter-case, this Court is inclined to

grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. However, keeping in view the

apprehension of the learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor, by

imposing the following conditions:

(i) the petitioners shall be released on bail in the event of

their arrest in connection with Crime No.118 of 2021 of Amaravathi

Police Station, Guntur District, on their executing personal bond for

Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two

sureties each for likesum each to the satisfaction of the Station

House Officer, Amaravathi Police Station, Guntur District;

(ii) On release, the petitioners shall appear before the Station

House Officer, Amaravathi twice in a week i.e. on every Monday and

Saturday in between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon, till filing of the

charge sheet;

(iii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly contact the

complainant or any other witnesses under any circumstances and

any such attempt shall be construed as an attempt of influencing the

witnesses and they shall not tamper the evidence and shall

cooperate with the investigation.

Any infraction of the above conditions would entail

cancellation of bail and the prosecution is at liberty to file application

seeking cancellation of bail.

It is made clear that this order does not, in any manner, limit

or restrict the rights of the police or the investigating agency from

further investigation as per law and the findings in this order be

construed as expression of opinion only for the limited purpose of

considering bail in the above criminal petition and shall not have any

bearing in any other proceeding.

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed.

___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

Date : 03.08.2022 RR

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5608 OF 2022

Date : 03.08.2022 RR