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

The State Of Telangana vs Shashi Bushan Pandey Munna
2022 Latest Caselaw 578 Tel

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 578 Tel
Judgement Date : 11 February, 2022

Telangana High Court
The State Of Telangana vs Shashi Bushan Pandey Munna on 11 February, 2022
Bench: Lalitha Kanneganti
        HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

                CRIMINAL PETITION No. 779 of 2022

O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. is

filed by the petitioner - State seeking cancellation of bail granted to

the respondents - Accused Nos. 2 and 4 in Criminal Petition No.

7398 of 2021, dated 15.11.2021.

2. The accused are alleged to have committed the

offences punishable under Sections 364-A, 302, 201, 120-B IPC.

and Section 3(ii)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act. As the charge sheet is not filed within

the statutory period as contemplated under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.,

this Court vide order dated 15.11.2021, granted bail to the

petitioners.

3. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that

the petitioners belong to the State of Uttar Pradesh and are

accused in several cases. As of now, they are languishing in jail

and if they are enlarged on bail, it would be very difficult for the

prosecution to secure their presence during the course of trial.

Further, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that in the

order dated 15.11.2021, at para 5, this Court had observed that

the petitioners are involved in more than eight cases and even if

bail is granted to them, they may not be released as they were

convicted in other cases and it is stated that it was not the

submission made by him and his contention is that the petitioners

jumped bail when they were granted bail in the State of Gujarat

and that contention was not recorded by this Court.

4. Be that as it may, the whole basis for this Court to

grant bail to the accused was not the submissions made by the

learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, but only on the ground that

even after lapse of 90 days, the prosecution failed to file charge

sheet and as contemplated under Section 167(2) CrP.C., they are

entitled for default bail, this Court categorically relying on the

judgment of the Apex Court in Uday Mohanlal Acharya v. State

of Maharashtra1 granted bail to the petitioners. Hence, this Court

finds no reason to cancel the said bail.

5. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

___________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 11th February 2022

ksld

(2001) 5 SCC 453

 
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