Telangana High Court
Mr. Macharla Ramesh vs The State Of Telangana And 2 Others on 13 December, 2022
Bench: Chillakur Sumalatha
HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3473 of 2022
ORDER:
Heard Sri Koka Srinivasa Kumar, learned counsel for
the petitioner, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor who
is representing respondent No.1-State and Sri V.Raghunath,
learned counsel who is representing respondent Nos.2 and 3.
2. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C
seeking to enlarge the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused
No.1 in S.C.No.131 of 2019 that is pending on the file of the
Court of Special Sessions Judge for trial of cases under
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act-cum-VII Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.
3. Making his submission, learned counsel for the
petitioner states that the petitioner is in judicial custody
since 2019 and on the ground that the petitioner may tamper
the evidence and threaten the witnesses, he was not enlarged
on bail and as of now, the entire trial proceedings are
Dr CSL, J
Crl.P.No.3473 of 2022
completed and therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. Learned
counsel also submits that there is no embargo upon
enlargement of the accused on bail at any stage of trial
proceedings. Learned counsel further submits that though
the trial ought to have been completed much earlier, the
prosecuting agency is dragging on the matter by filing one or
other interlocutory applications. By stating so, learned
counsel seeks for grant of bail.
4. Opposing the said submission, learned counsel
appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3 states that the
petitioner has killed his wife and his six-month-old son and
thereby, committed a heinous offence. Trial in the Sessions
Case in question would be completed within a month and in
case, the petitioner is now enlarged on bail, he cannot be
traced thereafter and therefore, he is not entitled for the relief
sought for.
5. The submission of the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor is that 23 witnesses were examined till now and
an application filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is pending
before the trial Court and the same is posted to 15.12.2022,
Dr CSL, J
Crl.P.No.3473 of 2022
and on that day or within few days thereafter, the said
application would be disposed of and within short time,
judgment would be pronounced.
6. The facts of the case, as could be perceived through
the contents of the charge sheet, are that the petitioner fell in
love with the daughter of the defacto complainant, who
belongs to Scheduled Caste. They both got married without
the knowledge of the elders and started residing separately.
The said girl pressurized the petitioner to inform about their
relationship to his parents and family members, but the
petitioner did not do so. The family members of the petitioner
started pressurizing him to marry. On coming to know about
the said fact, the wife of the petitioner increased the pressure
on the petitioner to inform about their relationship to the
elders. However, he did not do so. Later, the wife of the
petitioner gave birth to a child. The parents of the girl also
asked the petitioner to inform about their marriage to the
elders. Subsequently, the family members of the petitioner,
who got knowledge about the marriage, stated that the said
girl, who belongs to Scheduled Caste, will not be allowed into
Dr CSL, J
Crl.P.No.3473 of 2022
their home. The disputes continued. Finally, the petitioner
thought of eliminating the said girl and the child so that he
can marry again. On the date of incident, he took the victim
girl and the child, killed them and then poured kerosene and
burnt the dead bodies to screen the evidence.
7. The allegations thus levelled against the petitioner are
grave in nature. Though bail is a right and jail is an
exception, the said analogy cannot be applied for the accused
to flee away from the clutches of justice. The apprehension
expressed by the respondents is that in case the petitioner is
enlarged on bail, he will not be available in case he is
convicted for serving the sentence and thereby, the entire
exercise of the prosecution would be defeated.
8. Admittedly, as submitted by both the parties, the
Sessions Case would be disposed of on merits within short
time. At this juncture, having considered the gravity in the
allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is of the
view that the request of the petitioner cannot be honoured.
Dr CSL, J
Crl.P.No.3473 of 2022
9. Resultantly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.
However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to move a fresh
application for grant of bail in case the Sessions Case in
question is not disposed of by the trial Court within two
months from the date of this order.
10. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,
shall stand closed.
________________________________________
Dr. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
13.12.2022
dr
