Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Pinnelli Rama Krishna Reddy, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 14 August, 2024
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.5388 and 5389 of 2024
COMMON ORDER:
1. The Criminal Petition No.5388 of 2024 under sections 437
and 439 of the CrPC (480 and 483 of BNSS) is filed by A24 to
grant regular bail in connection with Cr.No.59 of 2024 of
Karempudi Police Station of Palnadu District for the offences
punishable under sections 143, 147, 307, 332, 435, 436 and 427
read with 149 IPC.
2. The Criminal Petition No.5389 of 2024 under sections 437
and 439 of the CrPC (480 and 483 of BNSS) is filed by A1 to
grant regular bail in connection with Cr.No.53 of 2024 of
Rentachinthala Police Station of Palnadu District for the offences
punishable under sections 147, 148, 324 and 307 IPC read with
149 IPC and 131(2) of Representation of the People Act, 1951.
3. In these two regular bail petitions, the petitioner is formerly
a Member of the Legislative Assembly of Macherla Constituency
of the State of Andhra Pradesh. The roster provision of this
Bench reads as below: -
• All Bail Applications;
• Criminal Revision Cases - From 2019 onwards;
• Cases pertaining to former/sitting MLA's & MP's.
4. When these petitions have come up for hearing, a question
has arisen as to whether they are required to be placed before
another Bench or not.
5. Sri N.Aswani Kumar, the learned special counsel
representing the State/respondent submits that the bail petitions
of other accused in these two crimes were heard and disposed of
by another learned Judge of this court and therefore the present
bail petitions may also be listed before the same Bench by virtue
of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
in Rajpal V. State of Rajasthan1 and Sajid V. State of Uttar
Pradesh 2
6. As against that Sri O.Manohar Reddy, the learned senior
counsel arguing on behalf of Sri S. Ramalakshmana Reddy, the
learned counsel for petitioner submits that the cases pertaining to
(2023) LiveLaw (SC) 1066
(2023) SCC Online SC 1816
former and sitting MLA's and MP's is the roster provision
available with this Bench and therefore these bail petitions may
be heard and disposed of by this court. Learned senior counsel
cited Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay V. Union of India3
7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel on
both sides, the following aspects are to be stated:
In the matters of bail hearing, the question that has now
arisen is whether it is offence centric or offender centric that has
to be followed. With a view to maintain consistency in the orders
pertaining to bail, it has been consistently ruled by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India that all bail applications arising out of the
same FIR have to be listed before the same Judge. The need,
necessity and the practice to be adopted have been dealt with
and principles have been laid down in
1. Kusha Duraka V. The State of Odisha
2. Rajapaul V. State of Rajasthan
3. Pradhyani V. State of Odisha
(2024) 1 SCC 185
4. Himanshu Sharma V. State of Madhya Pradesh
8. Pursuant to that the High Court of Andhra Pradesh issued a
practice direction in ROC.No.94/JUDL/2024 dated 31.07.2024,
the relevant part of which reads as below:
"The Scrutiny Officers at New Filing Section and Section
Officer of Criminal Section further directed that all bail
applications filed by the different accused arising out of the same
FIR should be listed before the same Judge except in cases,
where Judge has superannuated or has been transferred or
otherwise incapacitated to hear the matter.
The Scrutiny Officers at New Filing Section and Section
Officer of Criminal Section further directed to ensure that the
application for cancellation of bail should be listed before the
same Judge, who had granted bail to the applicant."
9. It is not in dispute that the bail applications of some of the
accused in these two crimes were earlier heard and disposed of
by another learned Judge of this court. For instance,
Crl.P.No.3790 of 2024 is one such instance. Therefore, it is
appropriate to list these bail applications before the same learned
Judge.
10. The submissions of the learned senior counsel for
petitioner that this court holds the Roster pertaining to cases of
former and sitting MLA's and MP's and therefore these bail
applications may be considered by this Bench as the petitioner is
a former MLA. This court cannot accede to this submission. Over
a period of seven years, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
formulated several guidelines for expeditious completion of trials
relating to former and sitting legislators and pursuant to that in
this State, special courts for the trial of offences relating to
elected Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative
Assembly have been designated. On earlier occasion, the
question that had arisen is as to whether the bail petitions of such
former or sitting MLA's and MP's can be heard by the regular
courts or by the special courts. Clarifying that aspect, a learned
Judge of this court had ruled that the special courts are
constituted only for trial of offences where such legislators are
involved and not for pre trial procedures such as bail hearings.
Therefore, the bail petitions therefore be heard and disposed of
by the competent courts holding jurisdiction of the subject crime
vide Chintamaneni Prabhakara V. SI of Police, Pedapadu
Police Station by an order dated 26.09.2019 in Crl.P.No.5741 of
2019. The ruling cited by the learned senior counsel in Ashwinin
Kumar's case (mentioned supra3) is the culmination of the
relevant writ petition with respect to one of the prayers which
intended expeditious disposal of cases against elected Members
of Parliament and Legislative Assembly wherein their Lordships
had indicated the entire journey and the formulation of various
measures for all the stake holders and passed certain directions
for early disposal of such cases. One of the aspects to be noticed
in the directions given by their Lordships is that each High Court
has to monitor such cases pending before the courts below and in
that regard a Division Bench of each High Court was assigned
with specific functions. Pursuant to that the Hon'ble Chief Justice
of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh assigned such subject
matter to Division Bench No.3.
11. The Roster point of this Bench pertains to former and sitting
MLA's and MP's is with reference to main matters where appeals
are filed against judgments of the courts below. Therefore, the
offender centric provision made here has to give way to the
offence centric principles laid down in the rulings cited earlier by
virtue of which bail petitions of all the petitioners in one FIR shall
be placed for hearing before the same learned Judge has to be
followed.
12. Therefore, in view of the discussion made above, Registry
is directed to list these matters before appropriate Bench as
expeditiously as possible.
________________________
Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR, J
Date: 14.08.2024
Dvs
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 5388 and 5389 of 2024
Date: 14.08.2023
Dvs
