Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Julakanti Brahma Reddy Brahma Nanda ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 13 August, 2024
APHC010647912023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
[3365]
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE DR V R K KRUPA SAGAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10005/2023
Between:
Julakanti Brahma Reddy @ Brahma ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
Nanda Reddy
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. LEO LAW ASSOCIATES LLP
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
The Court made the following:
2
Dr.VRKS,J
Crl.P.No.10005 of 2023
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.10005 of 2023
ORDER:
1. This criminal petition under section 438 of the CrPC is filed
by the petitioners/accused to grant anticipatory bail in connection
with Crime No.113 of 2023 of Macherla Rural Police Station of
Palnadu District for the offences punishable under Sections 337,
364, 34 IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC and
ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. Heard arguments of learned counsel for petitioner and
learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent/State. On
02.01.2024, respondent agreed to take out notices to de facto
complainant. None entered appearance for de facto complainant.
3. For petitioner, it is argued
• Petitioner is innocent and did not participate in the alleged
crime incident.
Dr.VRKS,J
• Facts do not make out a case for applying any of the penal
provisions alleged.
• In terms of law laid down by the courts application for
anticipatory bail is maintainable.
For respondents, it is argued
• Since it is a case of caste atrocity, the application for
anticipatory bail is not maintainable.
4. Perused the record.
5. As one could notice the offences alleged are both under
IPC, 1860 as well as SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989. The application moved is under section 438 of the CrPC
seeking bail in anticipation. Since it is a case of an alleged
atrocity, one shall notice the interdict contained in Sections 18
and 18A of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
which read as below.
18. Section 438 of the Code not to apply to persons
committing an offence under the Act,-
Dr.VRKS,J
Nothing in section 438 of the Code shall apply in
relation to any case involving the arrest of any person on
an accusation of having committed an offence under this
Act
18A(1).......
18A(2): - The provisions of section 438 of the Code shall
not apply to a case under this Act, notwithstanding any
judgment or order or direction of any Court.
6. A plain reading of the above provisions may make one to
think that an application for an anticipatory bail may not be even
registered for the purpose of hearing. However, it was also ruled
that registering a petition is purely administrative in nature and
the applicability or otherwise of interdict of law such as section 18
and 18A of the Act, 1989 require judicial application of mind and
judicial standards and therefore such applications are to be
registered and be placed for hearing vide P.Surendran V. State1.
7. A reading of section 18 of the Act, 1989 makes it visible
that the bar contained therein applies only when the accusation
indicates commission of an offence under the Act, 1989.
(2019) 9 SCC 154
Dr.VRKS,J
Therefore, it is always incumbent upon the court to find out from
the record whether the acts alleged against the petitioner do
prima facie indicate involvement of that accused for an offence
under the Act, 1989. However, if no prima facie offence is made
out from the allegations made in the FIR, the bar created by
sections 18 and 18A of the Act, 1989 shall not apply and such an
anticipatory bail application need to be considered in terms of
section 438 CrPC vide Prathvi Raj Chauhan V. Union of India2
8. Case diary indicates that the alleged crime incident
occurred on 21.12.2023. By then, this petitioner was leader of
TDP for Macherla Assembly constituency. The allegations are
that the de facto complainant and her family members were
travelling in auto rickshaw bearing No.AP07TD6843 near quarry
area in the outskirts of Kambampadu Village. There was a convoy
of five vehicles going on the road and that convoy belonged to the
preset petitioner. The specific allegation mentioned in the FIR is
that a white colour Safari car bearing No.AP07CU4646 was
driven by its driver at high speed, negligently and dashed the auto
rickshaw and consequently, the de facto complainant and her
(2020) 4 SCC 727
Dr.VRKS,J
family members sustained various injuries and the auto rickshaw
in which they were travelling turned turtle. It is specifically
mentioned in the FIR that the convoy stopped at a distance and
the people therein got down and the petitioner herein came and
enquired with the people who sustained injuries and asked them
to which village they belonged to. Then the de facto complainant/
the woman disclosed her name and her village and disclosed that
she belonged to Yerukula Caste. It is then, the allegations are
that, the petitioner and people who were accompanying him
abused her by caste name. Thereafter, there is specific mention
in the FIR that this petitioner pacified his followers and took the
injured into one of the vehicles in his convoy to take them to
hospital. Then it is specifically mentioned that without being
noticed by others in the vehicles, the son of the de facto
complainant made a telephone call to his relatives and their
relatives came and stopped the convoy in which the injured were
travelling and took the injured to hospital.
9. The submissions of the learned counsel for petitioner are
that it is a politically motivated case and the petitioner and his
people on noticing the accident intended to help the victims by
Dr.VRKS,J
securing another auto rickshaw in which they were taken to
hospital. However, by her political motives, this false case is
foisted. The specific contention is that the vehicle that allegedly
caused the accident is a vehicle that is falsely implicated and that
vehicle never got involved in this incident. The photograph of the
vehicle is annexed to the bail application to show that there was
no point of contact for this vehicle to indicate that it could have
collided with any other vehicle. A memo dated 09.01.2024 filed by
prosecution is available on record. It shows Mahindra Scorpio
Black in colour bearing registration No.TS07HR6060 with front
part of the vehicle in damaged condition. According to
prosecution, it is that vehicle which caused the incident. Thus, the
vehicle that is now stated to have caused the accident is not the
vehicle that is mentioned in the FIR lodged by the victim. Thus,
there is any amount of ambiguity and confusion seen from the
record. Moreover, it is not the case of prosecution that this
petitioner was driving any of the vehicles involved in this accident.
10. Even as could be seen from the averments of the FIR of
the victim, she and other victims were rescued by the petitioner
Dr.VRKS,J
and he arranged for their transportation to hospital. That shows
the concern of the petitioner and obedience to law.
11. As could be seen from the averments in the FIR, the
victims went to attend Semi-Christmas celebrations and during
their return, this accident occurred. The averments in the FIR
would themselves show that the victims and the petitioner are
strangers to one another. Thus, the caste name of the victims
was not known to the petitioner. When the petitioner was
enquiring about the victims, then the de facto complainant herself
not only disclosed her name and place of residence but also
disclosed her caste name. Till then, everything was only an
accident case. It is not known why she disclosed her caste name
though none asked it. However, it is only after she disclosed her
caste name, she was allegedly abused by her caste name. That
the allegations made appear very artificial making one to think
that these allegations prima facie do not disclose an offence of
caste atrocity.
12. The occupation and permanent residence of the petitioner
are not denied by the prosecution. Looking at the conduct of the
petitioner at the relevant time of the alleged offence, one would
Dr.VRKS,J
notice his inclination to oblige legal process. In such
circumstances, this court finds that any custodial interrogation
does not seem necessary. Hence prayer is granted.
13. In the result, this criminal petition is allowed. In the event of
arrest of the petitioner/accused, he shall be enlarged on bail on
executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand only) with two sureties of the like sum each to the
satisfaction of the investigating officer concerned. He shall mark
his attendance before the investigating police on 1st and 15th of
every month between 10.00 AM and 1.00 PM for three months or
till filing of the charge sheet whichever is earlier. The petitioner
shall make himself available for investigation by a police officer as
and when required, and he shall not, directly or indirectly, make
any inducement, threat or promise to any persons acquainted
with the facts of the case to dissuade him from disclosing such
facts to the court or to any police officer. He shall not indulge in
similar acts of crime. He must participate in the legal process as
required under law.
________________________
Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR, J
Date: 13.08.2024
Dvs
Dr.VRKS,J
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.10005 of 2023
Date: 13.08.2023
Dvs
