Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Betwee N vs Unknown on 18 April, 2023
I/A
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl
TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF APRIL
ll^/O THOUSAND AND ll^/ENTY THREE
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A V SESHA SAl `"
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE DUPPALA VENKATA
IANo.1 OF2023 'sS*_ ,.I . ,-i-+;
lN
CRLA NO: 1438 OF 2018
Betwee n :
Guruvendapalli Nagaraju, S/o. Bhaskar Rao, Aged about 29 years, R/o.Near
Jagajjevana Nagar, Muvva Village and Mandal, Krishna District.
...Appellant/Accused
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of
Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi.
...Respondent/Complainant
Counsel for the Accused: SRI T NAGARJUNA REDDY
Counsel forthe Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Petition under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances
stated in the grounds filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased
to suspend the execution of the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner
in S.C No. 68/2016 on the file of the Court of the Sessions Judge at Vizianagaram
and direct to release the petitioner on bail pending CRLA No.1438 of 2018 before
this Hon'ble Court, pending disposal of CRLA No. 1438 of 2018, on the file of the
High Court.
The court while directing issue of notice to the Respondents herein to show
cause as to why this application should not be complied with, made the following
order.(The receipt of this order will be deemed to be the receipt of notice in the
case). The Court made the following
ORDER:
"This is an application, filed under Section 389(1) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, seeking bail.
Main Criminal Appeal came to be preferred by the petitioner-accused
against the judgment dated 04.04.2018, passed by the Court of the learned
Sessions Judge at Vizianagaram, in Sessions Case No.68 of 2016. By way of
the said judgment, the learned Sessions Judge convjcted the accused-
petitioner herein for the offences punishable under Section 302, 201 & 498-A
I.P.C., and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the
charge under section 302 IPC and also to pay fine of Rs.4,00,OOO/- (Rupees
four Lakhs only), in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one year and
rigorous I-mprisonment for two years for the charge under section 498-A I.P.C.,
and to pay a fine of Rs,10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only), in default to
suffer simple I-mprisonment for three months and also to undergo rl-gorous
imprl-sonment for two years for the charge under section 201 I.P.C., and to pay
a fine of Rs.10,00O/-(Rupees Ten thousand only), in default to suffer simple
imprisonment for three months.
ln thl-s applicatl'on, the petitl-oner is seeking bail by placI'ng reliance on
the judgment of the composite High Court of Andhra pradesh in the case of
==t_ch:_ Pa?garao and ore., vs., state of Andhra Pradesh reported -ln I:2016{3,
ALT (Criml-Hal) 5O5 (AP)I. In the said judgment, the court laid down the
foIIowl-ng guidelines, while considering the bail applications of the present
nature:
"h(:)fh£.pteh:s.a,:A:I?.is^_c,:,:^vp:=d_f_a_I.. I.if£s __aLn1.wP,ose appea I is pendi ng
bmefnolr= ,:h#^:,2`:^rt` i,= ^e_I t! ±_a_I i_a_ _a_p_p_ I_!1 f.a {. b a i.I -aliv.-i -h : rEi:; i ;-a err5g :: : ga
minimum of five years.ImPriSOnire;i foIIowind -iis-io-;Jicti:n_;
(.2.).hS^r^a.nt.^o:I_ba±I_JnJ !a_I_0_rr .Of P.£rS?n_S failing in (1) supra shall be
=Iua3!e<::nt.orlhni,S__gJO^O_a.:On
Ja-II Superintendents; duct i n-the i ai I , as riFo-irea-lb;Jhr5-ri::ft;i:v5e
(^3±.I.:^1h.e_ !o_II_a_I_i!_g_ _:ategor!IeS. Of _Cases, the convicts will not be
eanntfftI,e,: t£:,nbrea!eleased on ba'Il, despite the-I'r iiriISij-;i ih~e ;;-;;e;i'av-I'n if)
and (2) supra.-
Trdh^e^^oEff:n±.S_Jr_e_Ialt_i?g_ _tp r?p? coupled_with murder of minor children
dQaaC%!tny:.m,uhrade^rttf^o_r^g^a_i F: I {i_a_n?.P_i,i _n_g 1 I_0 r.r= ii= 5-;.,-jkirfl i ;; -:f-ii:: I I:uu'F; Ii :
s^ettg=:!s_, :h^e__oEP£_n_cp_s _I?Ill ng. u n!deithe NationaI' S-iiirr:i; -ir:i-am-d~{ke
offences pertaining to narcoftic drugs.
(^4±_WJP!EI^e_g_rLa:.i.i_ng_bLa!I,± the two. fo.IIovyi_rg_ conditions apart from usual
c_a.n^!!t!o,nsL _h,a_I: tlOL Pe!mp?se!, yiz., (_1 ) the a-ii-5irI-:;i:rdr; -i:i'::s-tu:±
P^r_eS_e^n^f_.b=f_oJre,A:h£_ _Court ?i the tii_ine of -riea;i-i-i-;;-i-i;:c '&r:-:in"asI
A^p_p^e^a5I_s,-_ a_n_d_!2) _.:P_=y T.usf r£POrt_ in_ _!he-riii=-:itv; 'p;ii-:e vg;:{i':na±
once in a month during the bail period."
Instructions furnished by the jail Superintendent are placed on record
by the learned public prosecutor. According to the said instructions, the
conduct of the petl-tioner is satisfactory and he has completed more than five
years of actual sentencel lt is not the case of the prosecut-Ion that the llnstant
case falls under the exceptions as mentioned in the aforesaid decision.
For the aforesaid reasons, th-lS Petit-IOn iS allowed, direct-lng enlargement
of the pet-lt'loner on bail subject to the petitioner furnishing a personal bond of
Rs.50,00O/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) With two Sureties for the like sum
each to the sat-ls faction of the court of the learned Add'ltional Magistrate Of
First Class, Vizianagaram. It is made Clear that the Petitioner Shall attend
before the sa-ld court on one day in the first week of every month, pending
appeal and if the same |ls not adhered to, the same be brought to the not-lee of
this court for passing necessary order for cancellation of bail. lt is further
made clear that at the time of hearing the appeal, the petitioner shall be
present before this court.",
sd/- A. VENUGOPAL RAC
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
-../-,i,.
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFF]*CER
For/
To'1. The Add|ltional Magistrate Of First Class, V.lzianagaram
2. The Additional Jud'lcial Magistrate Of First Class, Vizianagaram
3. The Super'lntendent, Central Pr|lson, Visakhapatnaml Visakhapatnam Distr'lct.
4. One CC to SRl. T NAGARJUNA REDDY Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Couh of A.P. [OUT]
6. I One spare COPY
nPC
HIGH COURT
AVSSJ
&
DVRJ
DATED..18/04/2023
BAIL ORDER
I.A.NO.1 OF 2023
IN
CRLA.No.1438 of 2018
i
_ ,.i.€i? .\
at` (=fl``
\ _`
ALLOWED
