Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

A Nanda Kumar Nanda Kumar Naidu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 10606 AP

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 10606 AP
Judgement Date : 25 November, 2024

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

A Nanda Kumar Nanda Kumar Naidu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 25 November, 2024

 APHC010504262024

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                  AT AMARAVATI                        [3396]
                           (Special Original Jurisdiction)

             MONDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
                 TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
                            PRESENT
 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
                     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 708/2024
Between:
   A NANDA KUMAR @ NANDA KUMAR NAIDU, S/O. A. BHASKAR
   NAIDU,     AGED     52  YEARS,  R/O. DIGUVAMODALAPALLE,
   THAVANAMPALLE MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
                                                  ...APELLANT
                               AND
   THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC
   PROSECUTOR,         HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT
   AMARAVATI.
                                               ...RESPODENT
Counsel for the Appellant:
     1. D PURNACHANDRA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent:
     1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT :

The present criminal appeal has been filed by the Appellant/Accused

No.1 seeking to set aside the Order passed in Crl.M.P.No.1907 of 2024 in

Crime No.122 of 2024 by the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge-

cum-Special Judge for trial of cases under SCs & STs (PoA) Act, Chittoor,

dated 25.10.2024 and to release the Appellant on bail.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, the De facto Complainant

namely T.Sunitha, who belongs to SC Community was granted patta in

respect of the land situated in T.Puttur in 2010 and was also granted

pattadar passbook. While so, on 14.10.2024, the Appellant/Accused No.1

along with Accused No.3 with JCB trespassed into the land, leveled the

same and tried to plant saplings. On coming to know the same, when the

De facto Complainant went to the field and questioned about their acts,

Accused No.3 caught hold of her tuft, pushed her on the ground, insulted

her in the name of her caste. In the meantime, Appellant/Accused No.1

kicked her with legs and insulted her touching her caste. When her elder

son namely Sravan Kumar came to her rescue, Appellant/Accused No.1

with intent to kill, beat him with a boulder on the back side of his head and

caused severe bleeding injury due to which he fell down. In the meantime,

when her younger son came there, Accused No.2 took another boulder and

beat him over his head. Based on the report given by the De facto

Complainant, the present case has been registered.

3. Heard Sri D.Purna Chandra Reddy, learned counsel for the

Appellant/Accused No.1 and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant

Public Prosecutor, representing the State/Respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the Appellant/Accused No.1 would submit that there

are land disputes between the Appellant and the De facto Complainant.

Learned counsel would further submit that, this case emanates from a civil

dispute. Appellant as well as the De facto Complainant have been claiming

title over the disputed property. Learned counsel would submit that pattadar

passbooks were issued in the name of the Appellant/Accused No.1.

Learned counsel for the Appellant would further submit that the Appellant

has been in jail since 17.10.2024 and investigation is completed. Hence,

prayed to enlarge the Appellant on bail.

5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that, except the

present case, there are no other cases pending against the Appellant. It is

submitted that the investigation has been completed and Court may pass

appropriate orders by imposing conditions.

6. Though notice is served on the De facto Complainant, she did not

choose to submit any objections.

7. The bail application filed before the trial Court has been dismissed vide

Order dated 25.10.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.1901 of 2024 on the ground that the

investigation is pending.

8. As can be seen from the allegations made in the complaint, on

14.10.2024, while the Appellant/Accused No.1 along with Accused No.3 were

planting the saplings by leveling the subject land, the De facto Complainant

herself went there and questioned about their acts, as such, the alleged

incident occurred. However, it is not the stage to decide the culpability of the

Appellant / Accused No.1 in the commission of the alleged offence, by accepting

the allegations against him and it requires examination at full length of trial.

9. In view of the submission that the investigation has been completed

and the Appellant /Accused No.1 has been in judicial custody since

17.10.2024, the question of tampering with the evidence, does not arise. In

such circumstances, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Appellant / Accused

No.1 on bail. However, it is made clear that the observations made in this

Appeal are with regard to granting of bail to the Appellant / Accused No.1,

but not on the merits of the case.

10. In the result, the Criminal Appeal is allowed setting aside the Order

dated 25.10.2024 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1901 of 2024 in Crime No.122 of

2024 of Thavanampalli Police Station, by the learned I Additional District &

Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for trial of cases under SCs & STs

(PoA) Act, Chittoor and consequently bail is granted to the Appellant /

Accused No.1 on the following conditions:

i. The Appellant / Accused No.1 shall be released on bail on execution of a personal bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousands only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge- cum-Special Judge for trial of cases under SCs & STs (PoA) Act, Chittoor.

ii. On release, the Appellant shall appear before the Station House Officer, concerned, once in a week i.e., on Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet.

iii. The Appellant is directed not to hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

iv. It is made clear that the Appellant shall scrupulously comply with the above conditions and breach of any of the above conditions will be viewed seriously and prosecution is at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the bail.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________________ VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date:25.11.2024 Note: Issue C.C today Dinesh

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.708 of 2024

DATE:25.11.2024

Dinesh

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter