Gurrala Mahesh vs State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5277 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

           CRIMINAL PETITION No.6183 OF 2022

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 437 & 439 of

Criminal Procedure Code (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), seeking regular

bail by the petitioner/Accused No.112 in connection with Crime

No.138 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 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 3 and 4 of

Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section

32 of Police Act, 1861 and Section 32 of Police Act, 1861.

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

Collectorate, the mob pelted stones on Police personnel due to

which some of the Police sustained injuries, damaged the

glasses of Collectorate Office 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

complainant and his staff; attacked 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 lodged by the Home Guard, the present crime

was registered.

3. Heard Sri V.V.Satish, 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, in elaboration to what

has been raised in the grounds, contended that initially the

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

the confession statements of the other accused, his name was

arrayed as accused in the present crime. It is also contended

that some accused in other crimes registered in connection with

the same incident were granted regular as well as anticipatory

bails. It is also contended that the petitioner is also accused in

other crimes and basing on the PT warrant, he was arrested and

since 50 days he is languishing in jail and further he is ready to

abide any of the conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he

requested to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

5. On the other hand, 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 India 1 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.

7. A perusal of the complaint discloses that initially, the

petitioner's name was not reflected, but as per the confession

statements of the other accused, the petitioner's name is

reflected in the present crime.

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

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner

that petitioner herein is falsely implicated in the present crime

due to political differences, whereas, according to the

prosecution, petitioner is active participant in the rally and he

executed illegal acts as per conspiracy of his leaders.

The learned Special Assistant 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

and other social media platform, which resulted in occurrence of

large-scale violence and other related executing the illegal acts

as conspired.

Further, admittedly the mob consists of more than 1000

people. The complaint does not 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.

Till today, there is no material to show that the petitioners

have 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.

On perusal of the material on record, considering the

submissions of both the parties and in view of the fact that the

other accused were already granted regular/anticipatory bail by

this Court whereas the petitioners are languishing in jail, this

Court feels it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioners on the

following conditions:

(i) The petitioner/A-112 in connection with Crime No.138 of 2022 of Amalapuram Town Police Station shall be released on bail on his executing self bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, 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 AM and 12.00 noon, till filing of the charge sheet;

(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 any infraction of the same will be viewed seriously and bail automatically gets cancelled without any further order of this Court.

(Detailed order follows ....)

_________________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 18.08.2022

Note: After dispatching the advance order, please send the bundle to the CM Section B/O KA

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

Advance order

CRIMINAL PETITION No.3303 of 2021

Dated 01.10.2021

KA