C.Vivekananda Chilamakuri Vivek vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 7490 AP

     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

               CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7595 OF 2022

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of the Criminal

Procedure Code ('Cr.P.C.' in short), seeking pre-arrest bail, by the

petitioner/A4 in Crime No.173 of 2022 of Ananthapuramu Special

Enforcement Bureau Station, Ananthapuramu District, registered for

the offence punishable under Section 34 (a) of the Andhra Pradesh

Excise (Amendment) Act, 2020.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 14.08.2022, at

02.00 p.m., on reliable information, Enforcement Inspector, SEB

Station, Anantapuramu, along with staff and mediators, reached

Kakkalapalli cross, Rudrampeta Panchayathi, Ananthapuramu Rual and

found two male persons (A1 & A2) coming on a motorcycle with a

white polythene bag on petrol tank and on seeing the officials in

uniform, they tried to back the vehicle, then on suspicion they were

detained. On enquiry, they revealed that in the bag there are liquor

bottles of 30(180ml) Hyderabad Blue Superior Whisky and 18 (180ml)

Celebrity Brandy, total 48 (180m.) pet bottles. The raid party arrested

A1 and A2 and seized the said stock. Subsequently, on confession of

A1 and A2 that they purchased the said stock from A4 and A5-

Chilamakuri Vivek and Mangal, were arrayed as accused in the present

crime.

3. Heard Sri Gouthami Surapareddy, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri Sravan Kumar Naidana, learned Special Assistant

Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in elaboration to what has

been raised in the grounds, contended that the petitioner has been

falsely implicated in the present crime, on the basis of the confession

statement of A1. Further, it is submitted that there are no criminal

antecedents against the petitioner. It is submitted that now the

petitioner is apprehending arrest in the hands of the Police. As the

petitioner is the sole bread winner of his family, in the event if the

petitioner is arrested, his family will be put to great hardship and his

reputation in the society and in the family circles will be affected.

Further, it is stated that the petitioner would abide by any conditions

that may be imposed by this Court while granting bail and further, he

will co-operate with the investigation.

It is also submitted that the petitioner got filed Crl.M.P.No.1122

of 2022 and the same was dismissed on 16.09.2022 on the ground

that investigation is pending and other accused are yet to be

apprehended. As there is substantial progress in the investigation, the

present application is filed seeking to pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

5. On the other hand learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor

though fairly conceded that there are no criminal antecedents against

the petitioner, contended that confession statement is a weak piece of

evidence principle cannot be applied at this stage and contended that

in the event if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may not co-operate

with the investigation. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition.

6. On perusal of the material available on record prima facie it is

evident that the petitioner was implicated in the present crime on the

basis of the confession statement of A1. In Bullu Das Vs. State of

Bihar1 , while dealing with the confessional statements made by the

accused persons before a police officer, the Supreme Court held as

under:

"7. The confessional statement, Ex. 5, stated to have been made by the appellant was before the police officer in charge of the Godda Town Police Station where the offence was registered in respect of the murder of Kusum Devi. The FIR was registered at the police station on 8-8-1995 at about 12.30 p.m. On 9-8-1995, it was after the appellant was arrested and brought before Rakesh Kumar that he recorded the confessional statement of the appellant. Surprisingly, no objection was taken by the defence for admitting it in evidence. The trial court also did not consider whether such a confessional statement is admissible in evidence or not. The High Court has also not considered this aspect. The confessional statement was clearly inadmissible as it was made by an accused before a police officer after the investigation had started."

(1998) 8 SCC 130

7. Taking the submissions of both the learned counsel into

consideration and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court cited supra and as there are no criminal antecedents against the

petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the

petitioner, however by duly taking the apprehensions of the learned

Special Assistant Public Prosecutor into consideration, on the following

conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.173 of 2022 of Ananthapuramu Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Ananthapuramu District, on his executing self bond 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, Ananthapuramu Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Ananthapuramu District;

(ii) On release, the petitioner shall appear before the Station House Officer, Ananthapuramu Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Ananthapuramu District, once in a week i.e. on every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon, till filing of the charge sheet; and

(iii) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to influence the witnesses or tamper with the prosecution evidence and the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation.

Further, the petitioner shall scrupulously comply with the above

conditions and in case of infraction of the same, the prosecution is at

liberty to move appropriate application for cancellation of bail.

It is made clear that this order does not, in any manner, limit or

restrict the rights of the Police or the investigating agency from further

investigation as per law and the finding in this order be construed as

expression of opinion only for the limited purpose of considering bail in

the above Criminal Petition and shall not have any bearing in any other

proceedings.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

_______________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 29th September, 2022.

GBS