Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Maryadula Sivareddy vs The State Of A.P on 2 May, 2023
Bench: A V Sai, Duppala Venkata Ramana
1-I+ir_-_ _:]. , --i.
lN THE HIGH COURT OF A~NDriRA PRADESH AT AMARAVAT
TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY,
TWO THOUSAND AND ll^/ENTY THREE
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A V SESHA SAl
AND ,
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE| DUPPALA VENKATA RAMANA
lA No-..1 OF 2023
I . >`,. ilN.I_. ..I.r
CRLA NO; 2o11. OF 2018
Betwee n :
Maryadula Sivareddy, S/o. Kotireddy,,.Age:`32 years, R/o. Yerraguntlapadu Village,
phliranagaipuram Mandal, Guntur District' A|P' ...pETITlONER/APPELLANT/A-1
` :AND.. ^^.
The State of A.P, rep by its Public Prosieut8r-, High Court at Amaravathi.
..,. RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLA[NANT
petition under section 389(1 ) Cr-.P.'Our=praying that in the circumstances Stated
in the memorandum of grounds filed in §upPdH~of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to release the petitioner on bail !for a period of one month in Crl.A.No.
2011/2O18-before this Hon'ble Court.'!_Wbieh';I.filed against the judgment Passed in
s.c.No. 45+ of 2016 by the Court otlXlll Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Narasaraopet, Guntur District, Andhra_PradelSff, dated 12-09-2O17, Pending disposal
of CRIA No. 2011 of 2018, on the file,oftife,High Court.
•.._*,~_-a_ i+'± !.`=,i--i
t
counsel for the Petitioner :Dr CHALLA SRINIVASA REDDY
3t I ,.I:\..,`\ii.t., -;l
counsel for the Respondent :PUBILIC`P~ROSECUTOR
=_,,I.,,,;3,a,
The Court made the following ) I, _l'_,,.,i. _.!'i'__A: -
•['- _i=-_ :=., . ... -.:I .;'i --3
I -I I
ORDER:
ltThis is an application, fiT6d'+ru'hder Section '389(1) of the Code of
Criminal procedure, seeking bail. I.
I
-=\
\-
i
Main Criminal Appeal camel.t6l,b~e-t\®`2preferred by the petitioner-accused
J,I
fro.1 against the judgment dated. 1,?;.I.,9_a;.:Z-JP17, passed by the Court of the
learned xI[l Additional District and:-'S6`§'§ions` Judge, Narasaraopet, in Sessions
'`,'* +,
case No.451 of~2016. By way of the,~saiqeutj:H{Fqgment, the learned Sessions Judge
+
convicted the accused No.1-petitionerL'.;,herein for the offence punishable under
.-I ;_ii=---,
Section 302 I.P.C1, and sentencedr hirfI~L t^o u\ndergo Imprisonment for life and to
1'
pay a fine of Rs.1,OOO/-, in default, foA;sirffer simple imprisonment for a period
of three months. --,-`,
-1 I rty*=.
''& , =\-`_`-.I
-i-.`i,-=.-*. ,` : i=*'=_? ly
7In this application, the petitionerf is seeking bail by placing reliance on
• -`4.
the judgment of the Composite High`, C®Jtlft Of Andhra Pradesh in the case of
'Batchu Rangarao and ors., Vs., State-`dftS¢atiF,ra Pradesh reported -[n I:2016{3, NI
(criminal) 505 (AP)I. In the said judgrriism±`,-the Court laid down the following
guidelines, while considering the b;i-I ipbJircations of the present nature:
"(1) A person who is conviCted=$6ri+:'Ii_fe and whose appeal is pending T
/'
before this Court is entitled to--a`bp,ly:for bail after he has undergone a
minimum of five years impriso'riFheh€::following his conviction;
(2) Grant of bail in favour _of':p,a;s-one 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 categorirg-±''"*6f'!`':lc=ses, the convicts will not be
.+
entitled to be released on bail, ¥'i;5 their satisfying the criteria in (1)
-st-,,
and (2) Supra:
-d w-Ith murder Of minor Children
The offences relating to rape
dacoity, murder for gain, kid;ab Or ransom, killing of the public
servants, the offences faIIind'[`gdiX€5g;i+he National Security Act and the
offences pertaining to narcoii6€&itdids:
(4) While granting bail, the iwig-ftFglifg#ing conditions apart from usual
\±fa .-
conditions have to be imposed;viz:.'`,¢`t1) the appeIIants on bail must be
present before the court \a{ tfr€ i_irne of hearing of the criminal
Appeals,- and (2) they must reporf'`jn the respective Police Stations
.~ + -.
I. {.. _q_.r-
=.`J ~-
once in a month during the bail;b6
Instructions furnished by the`, ' )i_ perintendent are placed on recorcl
b+^u
tiding to the said instructions, the
Py the learned Public Prosecutorl=,
`<! ;?.t l'
conduct of the petitioner is satisf`a.,g±£`,dgivi+r,a'_pd he has completed more than five
=e'-* =_i ;;`_ + I:I .
years of actual sentence. lt is not th §-e.` of the prosecution that the instant
case falls under the exceptions as in the aforesaid decision.
For the aforesaid reasons, tt-#ijs ji:.ty dn is allowed, directing enlargement
_ng1
of the petitioner on bail subject to +`t I a
.a,r=
-
.9 I a) r furnishing a personal bond of
Rs.20,OOO/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand-~ohiy) with t\^,o sureties for the like sum
each to the satisfaction of the 6--gru-ftt`of the learned ll Additional Judicial
L`lt js made clear that the petitione+
Magistrate of First class, Narasari6
... 3t
..- -f A
ay in the first week of every month,r
Shall attend before the Said Court on a
Bred tO, the Same be brought tO the
pending appeal and if the same -ls|T_9i13qrJerea tO, tlle SalllC UC WIVut,,---_ -._i
i.-
notice of th-ls court for pass-lng Fee?S§ary Order for CanCellat-lan Of bail. lt is ._I
further made clear that at the time 9!,`ng?wT!P_g the appeal, the Petit-lOner Sha" be
t ,-i...| .
present before this court-" J-I
I,-r` +'lA;,~iJ-;.i sd/-s-. sR'NIVASA
_. __..... ,,BRAS.AD
^. nn^:
ASs]sTANT REG!STP`AR
/-a;i, (`l,.3`_y,
I ITFouE,CQIPYI I
I
i
Tol
I-First Class, NarasaraOPet, Guntur
1. The ll Add.ltional Judicial Magis£€r`6a
District
LJISlllul
2. The Xlll Addit'lonal District and SessidriS Judge, NarasaraOPet, Guntur
`~'' -i.`tr
`.I th
Distr®lct.
ch+Irids The Super'lntendent, Central Pfi`§6_fi;=:R§;+jahmundry,
a+jahmundry, East
EastGodavari
GodavariDistr-lot.
Distr-lct I-' 1__I _1
Tohnee Sctgtltoon sH£r sDerOcffHcAe[ Eh;EaRrNgl#ArS9AT RPEOEcDeYS;adttoon:a?eu [3upr uDgitr I ct
Two CCs to Public ProsecutO'r (AP}=>in~igh Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUTl
7. One spare COPY tr I
CVSS
(¢ ._` , a
-`T, i.i l!:~ li' rI*;,i,ch'
f`..!{ :`..i `l `i...I lj4_t` I
.. f. I
``.`.: t' '> .`\`' =
/
HIGH COURT
#_--
AVSSJ &
DVRJ
DATED.. 02/05/2023
ORDER
IANo.1 OF2023
lN
CRLA NO: 2011 OF 2018
DIRECTION
:€\
._.
6/\iJy`
