This Application Has Been Filed ... vs Unknown
2022 Latest Caselaw 7920 AP

         HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

                    MAIN CASE No.: Crl.A.No.486 of 2017

                                 PROCEEDING SHEET

 Sl.
                                             ORDER

No        DATE
03.    18.10.2022   MGR, J & TMR, J

                                         I.A.No.1 of 2022

This application has been filed under Section

389(1) of Cr.P.C to release the petitioner/

appellant/accused on bail by suspending the sentence

passed in Sessions Case No.254 of 2013 on the file of

the I Additional Sessions Judge, Chittoor, vide

judgment, dated 13.04.2017.

By the said judgment the petitioner/Accused was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 304-B IPC and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 498-A IPC and suffer imprisonment for six months and pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

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 counsel for the petitioner further submits that even on merits there is nothing on record to convict the petitioner for the offence under Section 304-B IPC. Only basing on the dying declaration, which was disputed by the defence, the petitioner was convicted.

We have perused the material on record. Though the petitioner has completed 5 years of actual sentence after his conviction, the same cannot be only ground for entertaining the prayer for bail in view of the parameters laid down in Batchu Rangarao & others case.

Even on merits, having gone through the judgment of the trial Court and considered the case of the prosecution that the petitioner had killed the deceased, his wife, by pouring kerosene on her and set fire, which is held to be proved by the trial Court, relying on the dying declaration, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

_________ MGR, J

_________ TMR, J

(continued...)

2016 (3) ALT (Crl.) 505 (DB) (A.P).

(continuation...)

Crl.A.No.486 of 2017

Registry is directed to prepare the booklet and post the appeal under the caption 'final hearing' on 27.12.2022.

_________ MGR, J

_________ TMR, J Vjl