Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The vs Unknown on 19 January, 2023
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No.: Crl.A.No.180 of 2018
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.
ORDER
No DATE
13. 19.01.2023 CPK, J & BVLNC, J
I.A.No.1 of 2022
in Sessions Case No.44 of 2008 on the file of the
learned Judge, Family Court-cum-VIII Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Ongole, filed the
present application under Section 389 (1) Cr.P.C.,
seeking bail, pending disposal of the Criminal
Appeal.
The petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 4 were tried
for the offences punishable under Sections 302,
324 and 352 read with 34 of IPC. Vide Judgment,
dated 15.12.2016, the learned Sessions Judge
convicted the accused No.3 for the offence
punishable under Section 302 of IPC and A.2 and
A.4 for the offence punishable under Section 302
read with 34 of IPC; A.3 for the offence punishable
under Section 324 of IPC; A.2 and A.4 for the
offence punishable under Section 324 read with 34
of IPC and A.3 for the offence punishable under
Section 352 of IPC and accordingly, sentenced A.2
to A.4 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 'life'
for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and
302 read with 34 of IPC. Further, A.3 is sentenced
to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two
(02) years for the offence punishable under Section
324 red with 34 of IPC; A.2 and A.4 are sentenced
to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two
(02) years for the offence punishable under Section
324 read with 34 of IPC and A.3 is sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three
(03) months for the offence punishable under
Section 352 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioners/A.2 to A.4
stated that the petitioners/A.2 to A.4 have
completed five years of actual sentence after
conviction by the Trial Court and in view of the
Judgment in the case of Batchu Rangarao &
others v. State of A.P.1, they would be entitled for
bail.
The fact that the petitioners/A.2 to A.4 have
completed five years of actual sentence after their
conviction is not in dispute. The Division Bench of
this Court in Batchu Rangarao & others supra,
held as under:
"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;
2016 (3) ALT (Crl.) 505 (DB) (A.P).
(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
Stations 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
discretion 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.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor states
that the case of the petitioners/A.2 to A.4 does not
fall within any of the exceptions laid down in the
said judgment; that there will not be any difficulty
in securing their presence in case of conviction and
that the conduct of the petitioners in the jail is
satisfactory.
It is not a case where the petitioners/A.2 to A.4
are alleged to have committed offence relating to
rape coupled with murder of minor children,
dacoity, murder for gain, kidnapping for ransom
etc.
Since the case of the petitioners/A.2 to A.4 fall
within the parameters laid down in Batchu
Rangarao & others case and as the judgment of
the Division Bench attained finality, the petitioners
shall be released on bail on certain terms and
conditions.
Accordingly, the Interlocutory Application is
allowed and the petitioners/A.2 to A.4 shall be
enlarged on bail on their executing personal bonds
for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
thousand only) each with two local sureties each
for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the
learned III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First
Class, Ongole. However, the petitioners/A.2 to A.4
shall report before the concerned Police Station
once in a month i.e., between 10:00 A.M. and 5:00
P.M. till disposal of the appeal and they shall
present before the Court at the time of hearing of
this appeal.
It is needless to mention that if, the
petitioners/A.2 to A.4 failed to appear before the
Court at the time of hearing the appeal or violate
the conditions imposed supra, liberty is given to
the learned Additional Public Prosecutor to take
steps accordingly.
___________
CPK, J
___________
BVLNC, J
Crl.A.No.180 of 2018
Since the booklet is ready, Registry shall list
for 'Final Hearing' on 23.02.2023.
___________
CPK, J
___________
BVLNC, J
DNB
