HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No: Crl.A.No.1139 of 2016
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.
ORDER
No DATE
18 11.10.2022 MGR, J & TMR, J
IA.No.2 of 2022
This application has been filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C to release the petitioner/appellant/accused No.1, on bail, by suspending the sentence passed in Sessions Case No.298 of 2015, dated 16.11.2016, on the file of the IV Additional Sessions Court, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the petitioner/Accused No.1 for the offence punishable under Sections 302 r/w 120-B and 404 I.P.C and accordingly, sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 120-B IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 404 IPC.
The main ground urged by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the petitioner has completed more than 5 years of actual sentence after conviction by the trial Court and in view of the judgment in Batchu Rangarao & others v. State of A.P.1, he would be entitled for bail Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, states that the conduct of the petitioner in the jail is satisfactory. However, he strongly opposed the application stating that the deceased is the wife of the petitioner-A1. The petitioner-A1, who is having illegal intimacy with A2, conspired with A2 & A3 to do away with the life of the deceased and A1 to A3 administered intoxicated cool drink to the deceased and taken the deceased to Kanumalopalli forest area and killed her by beating with a boulder on the head of the deceased and disappeared from that place. The trial Court, after careful examination of the entire evidence, convicted the petitioner and hence he is not entitled for any relief at this stage.
We have perused the material on record. The facts that the petitioner has completed 5 years of actual sentence after his conviction and
1 2016 (3) ALT (Crl.) 505 (DB) (A.P). his conduct in the jail are not in dispute. The same cannot be only grounds for entertaining the prayer for bail in view of the parameters laid down in Batchu Rangarao & others case.
In view of the seriousness of the offences for which the petitioner was convicted, we are not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.
Accordingly, the Application is dismissed.
_________ MGR, J
_________ TMR, J Crl.A.No.1139 of 2016
Post in the usual course as per its turn.
_________ MGR, J
_________ TMR, J Vjl
