Chitti Prasad vs The State Of Ap
2023 Latest Caselaw 937 AP

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AT AMARAVATI

MAIN CASE No.CRLA.No.995 of 2018

PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. OFFICE DATE ORDER No. NOTE

19. 16.02.2023 AVSS,J & VGKR,J

I.A.No.1 of 2022

The appellant, who is Accused No.4 in S.C.No.34 of 2014, on the file in the Court of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru, is the petitioner in the present application, filed under Section 389(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure, and the present application is filed seeking to release the appellant/petitioner(A4) on bail pending Criminal Appeal No.995 of 2018.

By way of the judgment, dated:12-02-2018, the learned I Additional District and Session Judge, West Godavari, Eluru, convicted the appellant/petitioner herein and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 302 read with Section 149 of IPC and also sentenced the appellant/petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six (6) months for the charge under Section 120-B read with 149 of IPC and also sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one (1) month for the charge under Section 341 of IPC, and directed that the sentences should run concurrently.

It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner that as per the law laid down by the Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Batchu Rangarao and others v. State of Andhra Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.607 of 2011, the appellant/petitioner is entitled to be

enlarged on bail as he completed five (5) years of actual sentence, after the conviction imposed by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, West Godavari, Eluru.

It is not in controversy that the petitioner herein has completed five (5) years of actual sentence. In this context, it may be appropriate to refer to the criteria laid down in the aforesaid judgment of the Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh which reads as follows:

"On Considering their valuable suggestions and after a thorough evaluation of the relevant factors, we are inclined to indicate broad criteria on which the applications for grant of bail pending the Criminal Appeals filed against the conviction for the offences, including the one under Section-302 IPC, and sentencing of the appellants to life among other allied sentences, are to be considered. Accordingly, we evolve the following criteria:

(1) A person who is convicted for life and whose appeal is pending before this Court is entitled to apply for bail after he has undergone a minimum of five years imprisonment following his conviction; (2) Grant of bail in favour of persons falling in (1) supra shall be subject to his good conduct in the jail, as reported by the respective Jail Superintendents;

(3) In the following categories of cases, the convicts will not be entitled to be released on bail, despite their satisfying the criteria in (1) and (2) supra: The offences relating to rape coupled with murder of minor children dacoity, murder for gain, kidnapping for

ransom, killing of the public servants, the offences falling under the National Security Act and the Offences pertaining to narcotic drugs.

(4) While granting bail, the two following conditions apart from usual conditions have to be imposed, viz., (1) the appellants on bail must be present before the Court at the time of hearing of the Criminal Appeals; and (2) they must report in the respective Police Station once in a month during the bail period.

This broad criteria cannot be understood as invariable principles and the Bench hearing the bail applications may exercise its direction either for granting or rejecting the bail based on the facts of each case. Needless to observe that grant of bail based on these principles shall, however, be subject to the provisions of Section-389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure."

Written instructions furnished by the Superintendent of Jails, Central Prison, Visakhapatnam, dated:08-01-2023, with regard to the appellant/petitioner, are placed on record by the learned Public Prosecutor, wherein it is stated that the conduct of the petitioner in jail is satisfactory. It is not the case of the prosecution that the case of the appellant/petitioner falls under the exceptions indicated in the operative portion of the judgement referred to supra.

Since the case of the petitioner falls under the parameters laid down in the above referred judgement rendered by the Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the case of Batchu Rangarao

and others v. State of Andhra Pradesh, this Court is inclined to release the appellant/petitioner on bail, subject to certain terms and conditions.

Accordingly, I.A.No.1 of 2022 is allowed and the petitioner shall be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the Court of the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate. Eluru, West Godavari. On such release, the petitioner shall report before the II Town L&O Police Station, Eluru, once in a week i.e., on every Saturday between 10.00 A.M. and 11.00 A.M. till the disposal of the appeal and it is further directed that the petitioner shall be present before the Court at the time of hearing of the appeal. It is needless to observe that, in the event of failure on the part of the petitioner, either in appearing before the Court, at the time of hearing of the appeal, or in fulfilling the conditions mentioned supra, the prosecution is at liberty to take steps against the petitioner in accordance with law.

________ AVSS,J

_________ VGKR,J Note: CC by today B/o MDP