Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Karuchola Ankamma Rao, Edlapadu ... vs The State Of Ap., Rep Pp., on 29 March, 2023

Bench: Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AIVIARAVATI
          WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF MARCH,
                    ll^/O THOUSAND AND ll^/ENTY THREE
                                  : PRESENT:                                   /I,tt`                 Jr


  THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRAri
                     lA No. 1 OF 2022 & IA.NO.1 OF 2021
                                       lN
                           CRLA NO: 1156 OF 2017
                                                                                            {'   ._

[A,No.1 of 2021 :

Betwee n :
Karuchola Mahendra Babu @ Mahendra @ Chinni, S/o. Koteshwar Rao, aged
about 28 years, R/o Edlapadu, Guntur District.
                                               ...petitioner/2nd AppellantlAccused No.2
                                                   (Appellant in CRLA 1156 OF 2017

                                      AND                      On the file Of High Court)
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Repiesented by Public Prosecutor, through
Inspector of Police, P.S.Chilukaluripet.Rural Circle, Guntur District.
                                                                       ...Respondent
                                                              (Respondents in-do-)

      Petition under Section 389 (1) c,f Cr.P.C is filed praying that in the
circumstances stated in petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct
release of the Peitioner/Appellant No.2 on bail, pending disposal of
CRLA No.1156 of 2017, on the file of the High Court.

      The petition coming on for ,hearing, upon perusing the petition and
memorandum of grounds of criminal appeal and upon hearing the arguments
of M/s Saleem, Advocate for the Appellant and Public Prosecutor for the
Respondent;

lA.No.1 of 2022|.

Between :
Karuchola Ankamma Rao, S/o. Yesobu,,aged about 32 years, R/o.Edlapadu,
Guntur District, presently lodged in Central Prison, Rajahmundry, Andhra
Pradesh.
                                       i           ...Petitioner/AppellanVAccused-1
                                               (Appellant in CRLA 1156 OF 2017
                                                          on the file of High Court)
                                      AND
The State of AP, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of the State of
AP at Amaravathi.
                                                                       ...Respondent
                                                              (Respondents in-do-)

       Petition under Section 389 (1) of Cr.P.C is filed praying that in the
circumstances stated in the petition, the High Court may be pleased to
 suspend the execution of sentence passed in Sc 333/2016 dt:30-01-2017 on
the file of the XllI Addl. Sessions udge, Narasaraopet, Guntur District and to
release the petitioner/A.1 on bai pending disposal of CRLANo.1156 of
2017, on the file of the High Court.

       The petition com-lng on for hearing, upon Perusing the Petition and
memorandum of grounds of criminal appeal and upon hearing the arguments
of sri s.M.Subhan, Advocate for the Appellant and Public Prosecutor for the
Respondent, the Court made the follovying;

ORDER:

'fI.A.Nos.1 of 2022 and 01 of 2021 are filed under Section 389(1) of

the code of criminal Procedure, seeking suspension Of the Sentence and also release of the petitioners on bail.

Main Criminal Appeal came to be preferred by the PetitiOnerS- accused No.1 and 2 against the judgment dated 3O.01.2017 passed by the court of the learned Xlll Additional Sees-lone Judge, Narasaraopet, Guntur District in Sessions Case No.333 of 2016. By way of the said judgment, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the petitioners/accused Nos,1 and 2 for the offence pun'lshable under section 376-D IPC and sentenced them to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of Twenty years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-each, lln default, to suffe; Simple imprisonment for one year. Further, Petitioner No.1/A.1 is also sentenced to undergo R.I for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-for the charge under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act:''-

ln this application, the petitioners are seeking bail by placing reliance on the judgment of the Composite High Court of Andhra pradesh -ln the Case of Batchu Ranga;ao and ore., Vs., State of Andhra pradesh reported -In [2O16(3) ALT (Criminal) 5O5 (AP)I. ln the said

judgment, the court laid down the following guidelines, while considering the bail applications of the present nature:

"(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 failing 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.

J.(, + I

(4) While granting bail, the two following conditions apart from usual conditions have to be imposed, viz., (1) the appeIIants 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."

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners have been in jail sin6e' 8 years two months. He further submits that the petitioners have good grounds to succeed in the appeal and therefore, he seeks suspension of sentence and also release of the petitioners on bail pending the appeal;

Learned Public Prosecutor vioLIld Submit that the COnduCt Of the

petitioners in jail is satisfactory an'd the petitioners have been in jail for the last eight years and the court may pass appropriate orders in the light of the guidelines mentioned in Bafchu RangaraoJs case ( referred supra).

As seen from the record, th'e Petitioners have been in judicial custody since 8 years two months.

Having heard the SubmiSSiOnS Of both the COunSel, taking into cons-lderation the period of imprisonment already undergone by the petitioners and as it is not the cas6 ''of the prosecution that the instant case falls under the exceptions as mentioned in the aforesaid decision, it is appropriate to release the petit-loners on bail on the following conditions.

Accordingly, these two Pet-ltions are allowed and the execution Of sentence of impr-[sonment -Imposed against the Petitioners/A.1 and A.2 in s.c.No.333 of 2016 on the file lOf the learned XIII Add-ltionaI Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, Guntur District, is Ordered tO be Suspended, I-Ill the disposal of the criminal Appeal. They sha" be released On bail subject to the petitioners furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,OOO/- (Rupees Twenty F-lve Thousand only) each v'ith two local Sureties for the like Sum each to the satisfaction of the court of the learned xlII Additional sessions Judge, Narasaraopet, Guntur District. lf the Petitioners have any passports, they shall deposit the same before the trial court, lt is made clear that the petitioners shall attend before the said Court on Monday in the first Week Of every month between lO.30 am to 05.00 pm, pending the appeal, and if the` same is not adhered to, the concerned court is a-lrected to inform the same to this Court for passing necessary order for cancellation of the bail."