HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No.: Crl.A.No.1218 OF 2016
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl. OFFICE
ORDER
No DATE NOTE
29. 01.02.2022
CPK, J & Dr. KMR, J
I.A.No.2 of 2021
The petitioner, who is sole accused in Sessions Case No.677 of 2015 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Anantapur at Hindupur, filed the present application under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (Cr.P.C.), seeking bail, pending disposal of the Criminal Appeal.
The petitioner/sole accused was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 376 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (I.P.C.).
Vide judgment, dated 27.10.2016, the learned Sessions Judge, convicted petitioner/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 379 I.P.C. and accordingly, sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two years for the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C.; rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 379 I.P.C.
The only ground on which the present application seeking bail came to be filed is that the petitioner has completed 5 years of actual sentence after conviction by the trial Court and having regard to the fact that the conviction is only under Sections 302 and 379 IPC, the petitioner would be entitled for bail in view of the Judgment in Batchu Rangarao & others v. State of A.P.1. The learned counsel further submits that health
1 2016 (3) ALT (Crl.) 505 (DB) (A.P). condition of the petitioner is also not good as he is frequently falling sick in jail. The same is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor Sri K.Srinivasa Reddy, contending that case of the petitioner falls under the exceptions carved out in Batchu Rangarao's case. He further submits that if the petitioner seeks bail on medical grounds, he has to come up with the specific plea in a separate bail application, but not in the present application filed in the month of November, 2021.
Before proceeding further, it would be appropriate to refer to the conclusions arrived at, in Batchu Rangarao's case, which read as under:
"On considering their valuable suggestions and after a thorough evaluation of the relevant factors, we are inclined to indicate broad criteria on which the applications for grant of bail pending the Criminal Appeals filed against the conviction for the offences, including the one under Section-302 IPC, and sentencing of the appellants to life among other allied sentences, are to be considered. Accordingly, we evolve the following criteria:
(1) A person who is convicted for life and whose appeal is pending before this Court is entitled to apply for bail after he has undergone a minimum of five years imprisonment following his conviction;
(2) Grant of bail in favour of persons falling in (1) supra shall be subject to his good conduct in the jail, as reported by the respective Jail Superintendents;
(3) In the following categories of cases, the convicts will not be entitled to be released on bail, despite their satisfying the criteria in (1) and (2) supra:
The offences relating to rape coupled with murder of minor children, dacoity, murder for gain, kidnapping for ransom, killing of the public servants, the offences falling under the National Security Act and the offences pertaining to narcotic drugs.
(4) While granting bail, the two following conditions apart from usual conditions have to be imposed, viz., (1) the appellants on bail must be present before the Court at the time of hearing of the Criminal Appeals; and (2) they must report in the respective Police Stations once in a month during the bail period.
This broad criteria cannot be understood as invariable principles and the Bench hearing the bail applications may exercise its discretion either for granting or rejecting the bail based on the facts of each case. Needless to observe that grant of bail based on these principles shall, however, be subject to the provisions of Section-389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure."
A reading of clause (3) makes it clear that in case of offences relating to dacoity, murder for gain, etc., the petitioner cannot claim relief in terms of the said judgment. The Division Bench also held that while considering the bail application, the Court can exercise its discretion either for granting or rejecting the bail, basing on the facts of each case.
In the instant case, the petitioner is convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 379 IPC and the stolen properties were said to have been recovered from the petitioner/ accused. Having regard to the above, we see no ground to grant bail to the petitioner/ accused basing on Batchu Rangarao's case.
Insofar health condition of the petitioner/ accused is concerned, as seen from the record, the present application was filed in the month of November, 2021 and the present health condition of the petitioner is not known. Therefore, it is left open to the petitioner to make a fresh application, in case the petitioner is unwell.
With the above observation, the petition is disposed of.
________________ CPK, J
________________ Dr. KMR, J DRK
