Tammana Somana Veera Venkata ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5485 AP

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

           CRIMINAL PETITION No.6284 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.223 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 T.V.Jaggi Reddy, 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 accused in other

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

languishing in jail and requested to enlarge the petitioner on

bail and he is ready to abide any conditions that may be

imposed by this Court.

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.

6. 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 above crimes.

7. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner

that petitioner herein is falsely implicated in the present crime

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

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.

8. The learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor

specifically urged that petitioner's custody is important in this

case, since according to the prosecution, he is active participant

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.

9. As pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner to attract

Sections 146 and 147 of IPC, there should unlawful assembly. For

better appreciation it is appropriate to extract Sections 141, 146

and 147 of IPC.

141. Unlawful assembly.--An assembly of five or more persons is designated an "unlawful assembly", if the common object of the persons composing that assembly is--

(First) -- To overawe by criminal force, or show of criminal force, 1[the Central or any State Government or Parliament or the Legislature of any State], or any public servant in the exercise of the lawful power of such public servant; or

(Second) -- To resist the execution of any law, or of any legal process; or

(Third) -- To commit any mischief or criminal trespass, or other offence; or

(Fourth) -- By means of criminal force, or show of criminal force, to any person, to take or obtain possession of any property, or to deprive any person of the enjoyment of a right of way, or of the use of water or other incorporeal right of which he is in possession or enjoyment, or to enforce any right or supposed right; or

(Fifth) -- By means of criminal force, or show of criminal force, to compel any person to do what he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do what he is legally entitled to do.

Explanation.--An assembly which was not unlawful when it assembled, may subsequently become an unlawful assembly.

146. Rioting.--Whenever force or violence is used by an unlawful assembly, or by any member thereof, in prosecution of the common object of such assembly, every member of such assembly is guilty of the offence of rioting.

147. Punishment for rioting.--Whoever is guilty of rioting, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Thus, there must be unlawful assembly as defined under

Section 141 of IPC for attracting offences under Sections 146 and

147 of IPC. In the present case nothing is forthcoming from the

record to show that all the people in the mob had a common

intention of committing an offence.

10. The other contention raised by learned Public Prosecutor is

regarding applicability of Section 307 of IPC. Section 307 of IPC

reads thus:

307. Attempt to murder.--Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to 1[imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. Attempts by life convicts.--

2[When any person offending under this section is under sentence of 1[imprisonment for life], he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death.]

11. 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 petitioner.

12. 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.

13. 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.

14. 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 petitioner is languishing in jail, this

Court feels it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner, however,

on certain conditions.

In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed on the

following conditions.

(i) The petitioner/A-223 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.

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

Dated : 23.08.2022

Rmn

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

ALLOWED

CRIMINAL PETITION No.6284 OF 2022 Dated : 23.08.2022

Rmn