Yerramsetty Ramudu, Krishna Dt., vs The State Of Ap., Rep Pp.,
2022 Latest Caselaw 6890 AP

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

MAIN CASE No.: Crl.A.No.493 of 2017

PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.No DATE ORDER

06. 12.09.2022 MGR, J & TMR, J I.A.No.2 of 2022

The petitioner-appellant/A.1 filed the present application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C., to enlarge him on bail by suspending the conviction and sentence imposed in SC.No.189/2010 on the file of the IX Additional Sessions Judge, Krishna (FTC), Machilipatnam pending disposal of the Criminal Appeal.

Vide judgment, dated 31.03.2010, the learned IX Additional Sessions Judge, Krishna (FTC), Machilipatnam convicted the petitioner/A.1 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C and accordingly, sentenced him to suffer Life Imprisonment and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.

The only ground on which the present application came to be filed seeking bail is that the petitioner has completed 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 Public Prosecutor, on written instructions, states that the conduct of the petitioner in the jail is satisfactory.

The fact that the petitioner has completed 5 years

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

of actual sentence after his conviction is not in dispute.

As the case of the petitioner does not fall within any of the exceptions and falls within the parameters laid down in Batchu Rangarao & others case, and as the conduct of the petitioner in the jail is satisfactory, we are inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail on certain terms and conditions.

Accordingly, the Interlocutory Application is allowed and the petitioner/A1 shall be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned IX Additional Sessions Judge at Machilipatnam. However, the petitioner/A1 shall report before the concerned Police Station once in a month i.e., on last Sunday of the month between 10:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M till disposal of the appeal and he shall be present before the Court at the time of hearing of this appeal.

It is needless to mention that if the petitioner failed to appear before the Court at the time of hearing the appeal or violated the conditions imposed supra, liberty is given to the learned Public Prosecutor to take steps accordingly.

_________ MGR, J

_________ TMR, J Crl.A.No.493 of 2017

Post on 26.12.2022.

_________ MGR, J

_________ TMR, J CSR