Ramalla Krishna vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 7357 AP

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 7357 AP
Judgement Date : 26 September, 2022

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Ramalla Krishna vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 26 September, 2022

Bench: Ravi Cheemalapati

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVAT!
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER,
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
'PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPAT
CRINENAL PETITION NO: 6338 OF 2022

 

Rehwvean

tay

Ramalla Krishna, Gio Veeranna, Aged 29 years, Constable G.D. GHD Ne.

(5040089) in 48th Gatialion $.5.8., Jaynagar, Bihar and Rio Sompuram
Village. Venada Mandal, Viz lanagaram Distr aot.
. Pattioner/Accused
AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Q/allampudi Police Station) Rep. by the Public

Prosecutor, High Cour of Andhra Pradash, Amaravathi, Guntur District,
. RespondentDelacta Campisinant -

Petition under Section 438 of Cr. P.C, praying thai in the clrournstances stated
in the memorandum of grounds flad in Criminal Petition, the High Courl pleased to
diract the respondent police fo enlarge the petitianer on ball In the avent of arrest in
cormection with Crime No. 50 of 2022, Valampuc) Police Station, Vigianagaramn
District,

Tas petite on coming on for hearing, upan perusing the Petition and the
memorandum of grounds filed in support thereef and the order of the High Court
dated 02.09.2082, W2OG 2022 & 23.09.2082 made hersin and upon hearing ine
arguments of Sri Arrabo tly Sal Naveen Advocate for the Petitioner and the Special

Asst. Public Prosecutor for the Respondent, the Court made the inilowing:

ORDER:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.G338 OF 2024

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is fled under Section 438 of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "Cr.P.C."}, seeking

nticigatery ball, by the pe ttioner/sole accused in Cr. No.0 of

2022 of Vallampudi Police Station, Vinlanagaram registered for

m my in B LY sels

oS oft

ts de C3 po fot wn, 3 pe ae ioo thy A mx tad ng oH

the offence punishable unde

of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short IPC},

2s The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Acc used faliowed the de facto complainant em the pretext of love and sexually exploited her by promising to marry her. When the de fecto complainant asked to marry her, he refused. On 99.95.2022, he secretly merried another girl wi ithout informing ta anyone, Hence, the above crime was registered against the

petitioner

3. Weard Gri A, Sal Naveen, isarned counsel for the gettioner and jearned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor for the

respondent- State.

4 Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration

contended that the petitioner/Accused was falsely implicated in rhe present crime and reading of the complaint would apposar that there was consensual sexual relationship between the accused and victim. Hence, Section 375 of IPC does not attract, Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the bail applications got filled by the petitiener In Cri.M.P.Nos. 191 anc 2/3 of 20232 were dismissed by the tral court on 18.07.2022 and 05.08.2022. He further contended that only to

harass the petitioner as he is working in Army, the present

ifs

crime is registered and In the event of his arrest, he will lose ht job. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of His case maced a judgment of Hon'ble Apex court in [email protected] Mohammad vs. The State of Rajasthan & Another'.

Qn the above contentions, the learned counsel for the

petitioner sought for grant of anticipatory ball to the petitioner.

5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor submits that absconding charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner and if the patiioner is granted anticipatory ball, he may hamper the

process of investigation and tamper with the prosecution

* 2025 Livelaw (SC} 592

evidence, Hence, opposed the petition and orayed for dismissal

of the same,

6. Learned counsel! for the petitioner draws the attention of

this Court to para No.4 in the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Ansaar Mohammad vs. The State oF Rajasthan &

Another?, which reads as follaws:

4. In view of the said fact, the cammlainant has willingly been

staying with the appellant and had the relationship. Therefore,

now if the relationship is not working out, the same cannot bea a ground fer Jodging an FIR far the offence umder Section

SPEER Lay IPC".

7, Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is working in Army in miner, as such It may not be possible to appear before police station except for investigation purpose.

@® A perusal of the complaint shows that there is a consensual sexual relation between the petitioner and defacto

complainant, :

"2902 LiveLaw (SC} 598

9. Faking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the contentions raised by both the learned and as the petitioner is a soldier and by takin ng the judgrment referred fo supra into consideration, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatery ball to the petitioner, however the apprenension of the learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor Into consideration, on the following conditions:

() The petitioner shall be released on ball in the avent of His arrest In connection with Cr.No.SQ of 2022 oF the Yallampudi Paice Station, Viglanagaram, on His executl ing [email protected] self mond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only} with two Sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer, Vallampudl Police Station, Vinianagaram.

(i) The petitianer shall nat make ary attempt to ta: mper with the prosecution evidence. He shall make hirnself available to the investigating officer whenever required by them to

faciiitate proper | investigation in this case

(CH) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly contact the complainant or any other witnesses under ary

cireumstances and any such attempt shall be construed as an

ween en we

Further, the pet

iio X

conditions,

riers shall scruny above corditions and if there }

shall not tamper the th the investigation

lousy ¢

y comply with the s breach of any af the above ik wil be viewed sericusiy and if also enfalls cancellation of the ball and In such case prosecution shall move appropriate appl nm for such cancellation. Te is made ciear that

fmit ar restrict the

: rights agency from further

this

investi order be corstruecd as

' xDP imited purpose of considering ba and sh

Consequently

muscellk shall sta

SOUS SOOk a closed.

TRUE COPY!

ation as per law and th

yo Par 3 the ako ali not have any bearing im any

police