Pilli Pruthvi Raj Alias Pruthvi vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5140 AP

         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

                CRIMINAL PETITION No.6032 OF 2022

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 437 & 439 of Criminal

Procedure Code ('Cr.P.C.' in short), seeking regular bail, by the

petitioner/Accused-256 in Crime No.139 of 2022 of Amalapuram Town

Police Station, East Godavari District, registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 307, 143, 144, 147, 148, 151, 152, 332, 336,

427, 188, 353, 324, 435 read with 149 of IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of

Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 32 of the

Police Act, 1861.

2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that on 24.05.2022 at about 4.00

p.m., on a call given by JAC of Konaseema Sadhana Committee, huge

number of people gathered for submitting objections pursuant to issuance

of Gazette notification with regard to change of name of Konaseema

District, by violating the order under Section 144 of Cr.P.C. and Section 30

of the Police Act. The mob started rally at Kalasam Centre, Amalapuram

Town and proceeded to Clock Tower Centre and in the meanwhile various

groups of public came from four corners to the clock tower centre and

formed into a huge mob.

Thereafter the mob moved to Collectorate and on the way to

Collectorate, when Police were discharging their duties, the mob pelted

stones on the Police and also burnt BVC college bus which was used as

transport vehicle for Police.

Further, when the Police tried to control the mob at the

Collectorate, the mob pelted stones on Police personnel due to which

some of the Police sustained injuries and damaged the glasses of the

Collectorate and Ambedkar Bhavan.

Thereafter, the mob proceeded to Red Bridge (Erra Vanthenna),

intercepted two RTC buses, damaged them and set fire to the buses.

The mob further moved towards the house of Hon'ble Minister.

When the mob shouted and beat police persons, AR constable fired

rounds in air, but agitators attacked police personnel and staff of the

Hon'ble Minister, caused damage to the furniture and set fire to the house

of the Minister and later proceeded to the house of local MLA. Basing on

the complaint of the Village Revenue Officer-1 of 30th Ward, Amalapuram,

Crime No.139 of 2022 was registered.

3. Heard Sri Bokka Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner

and Sri Soora Venkata Sainath, learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor

for the respondent-State.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially

petitioner's name was not figured in the complaint. Basing on the

confession statement of the other accused, who were arrested prior to the

petitioner, his name was reflected and it is also contended that some of

the accused in the crimes registered in connection with the same incident,

were granted bail and sought to consider the present petition also in

similar lines. It is also contended that the petitioner is languishing in jail

since 17.06.2022 and requested to consider enlarging the petitioner on

bail on any conditions that may be imposed.

5. On the other hand, the learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor

submitted that the involvement of the petitioner is evident from the

photographs taken at the scene of offence and investigation is still

pending. If at all this Court wants to consider the present bail petition, in

such case, he draw the attention of the Court to the decision of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kodungallu Film Society v. Union of India1

wherein it is held as follows:

C. Liability of person causing violence

a) .......

          b)      .......

          c)      A person arrested for either committing or initiating,

promoting, instigating or in any way causing to occur any act of violence which results in loss of life or damage to property may be granted conditional bail upon depositing the quantified loss caused due to such violence or furnishing security for such quantified loss. ....."

Relying on the judgment cited supra, the learned Special Assistant

Public Prosecutor, prayed this Court to impose some costs for the loss

caused to the State.

6. A perusal of the complaint discloses that initially the petitioner's

name is not reflected, but on the basis of confession statement of the

other accused, the petitioner's name is reflected in the above crime.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that

petitioners herein are falsely implicated in these crimes due to political

differences whereas according to the prosecution, petitioners are active

participants in the rally and they executed illegal acts as per conspiracy of

their leaders.

The learned Public Prosecutor specifically urged that petitioners'

custody is important in this case, since according to the prosecution, they

are active participants in hatching up the plan through whatsapp group

(2018) 10 SCC 713 : 2018 SCC Online SC 1719

and other social media platform, which resulted in occurrence of large-

scale violence and execution of other related illegal acts as conspired.

Further, admittedly the mob consists of more than 1000 people.

None of the complaints indicate about common intention or common

object of committing an offence punishable under Section 307 IPC.

Specific overt acts were not attributed against the petitioners.

It is also evident from the record that the mob gathered for

submitting their representations at Collectorate office, but not with an

intention of committing any offence and admittedly the mob was not

armed with weapons. Photographs filed by prosecution do not show that

mob is armed with weapons.

With regard to the contention of the learned Special Assistant

Public Prosecutor, relying on the judgment cited supra, till today, there is

no material to show that the petitioner has damaged any property. In

view of the same, the decision relied on by the learned Special Assistant

Public Prosecutor cannot be made applicable at this stage and his request

to impose costs cannot be considered.

Taking the facts and circumstances of the case into consideration

and considering the submissions of the learned Counsel for the petitioner

that in similar matters this Court has granted bail, this Court feels it

appropriate to consider granting bail to the petitioner herein on the

following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing self

bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two

sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned

Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Judicial Magistrate of

First Class, Amalapuram;

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the Station House Officer,

Amalapuram Town Police Station, twice in a week i.e. on every

Monday and Thursday between 9.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon, till

filing of the charge sheet; and

(iii) The petitioner 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 shall not tamper the evidence and

shall co-operate with the investigation.

Further, the petitioner shall scrupulously comply with the above

conditions and in case of infraction of the same, the prosecution is at

liberty to move appropriate application for 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 finding 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

proceedings.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 12th August, 2022 GBS