Pinapothu Durga Prasad vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4444 AP

         THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

                CRIMINAL PETITION No.5224 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-220 in Crime No.140 of 2022 of Amalapuram Taluq

Police Station, East Godavari District, registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 341, 143, 144, 147, 148, 151, 336, 435, 188

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 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.

Basing on the complaint given by driver of the RTC bus this crime

came to be registered against the petitioner and other accused.

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 submitted that initially

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

confession statement of A1, 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 22.06.2022 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) .......

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




           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 confession statement, the petitioner's

name is reflected in the above crime.

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-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Amalapuram;

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

(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.

(iv) The petitioner shall furnish his mobile phone number and residential address as well as that of his sureties to the I.O./SHO concerned and they shall keep their mobile phones operational at all times during this period and in the event of any change of the same, they shall immediately inform the same to the I.O./S.H.O. and,

(v) The petitioner shall drop a pin location on Google Maps so that the location of the petitioners is available to the Investigation Officer.

Further, the petitioner shall scrupulously comply with the above conditions and breach of any of the above conditions will be viewed seriously and bail automatically gets cancelled without any further order of this Court.

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

________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 25th July, 2022 GBS