IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN :PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY CRL.P. NO:4800 of 2014 Between:
Mopuri Vemareddy, S/o. Harinarayana Reddy (A-7) . Petitioner/Accused AND State of A.P. rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad.
. Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., praying that in the circumstances stated in the petition and the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to direct release of the Petitioner on Bail in the event of his arrest pursuant to registration of Crime No. 41/2014 of Rajahmundry II Town P.S., Rajahmundry Urban, East Godavari District.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the grounds filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri T.Nagarajuna Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Public Proecutor for the Respondent, the Court made the following.
ORDER:
“This Criminal Petition, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (For short, ‘the Cr.P.C.’) is filed by the petitioner-A7 seeking to grant pre-arrest bail, since he is apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.41 of 2014 of Rajahmundry II Town Police Station, Rajahmundry Urban, East Godavari District, for the offences punishable under Sections 285, 336 read with 149 IPC, Rule 426/190(3), 184, 132(1), 179(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1989.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the de facto complainant, who is working as a Crime Reporter, Hyderabad, gave report to the police stating that he boarded a bus belonging to Meghana Travels on 5.3.2014 to go to his native place viz., Panduru, Kakinada, to attend the marriage of his sister. On 6.3.2014 at about 7.00 A.M, when the bus reached Rajahmundry, the traffic police found emitting smoke from the cabin on the back side, and tried to stop the bus. It is further stated that though the passengers were shouting, the driver of the bus drove the vehicle negligently and stopped at DTDC Courier Office. On verification, the police found two tins of Hydrochloric acid, which emitted smoke on rear side.
3. The main contention of the petitioner is that he is the Managing Director of Solar Water Heaters and in case he is arrested in connection with this crime, he will be put to much inconvenience and sought for pre-arrest bail in the event of his arrest by the police.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the petition on the ground that carrying acid tins is against the provisions of the M.V.Act.
5. As seen from the material available on record and by applying the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in
[1]
State of Maharashtra Vs. Mohd. Sajid Husain , wherein the Apex Court laid down the following guidelines for grant of anticipatory bail :
“1. The nature and gravity or seriousness of accusation as apprehended by the applicant;
2. The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether he has, on conviction by a Court, previously undergone imprisonment for a term in respect of any cognizable offence;
3. The likely object of the accusation to humiliate or malign the reputation of the applicant by having him so arrested; and
4. The possibility of the appellant, if granted anticipatory bail, fleeing from justice.”
and Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra
[2]
and others , the Hon’ble Apex Court held as follows :
“The following factors and parameters can be taken into consideration while dealing with the anticipatory bail :
i) The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made;
ii) The antecedents of the applicant including the facts as to whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence;
iii) The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice;
iv) The possibility of the accuser’s likelihood to repeat similar or the other offences;
v) Where the accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her;
vi) Impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in case of large magnitude affecting a very large number of people;
vii) The Courts must evaluate the entire available material against the accused very carefully. The Court must also clearly comprehend the exact role of the accused in the case. The case in which accused is implicated with the help of Section 34 and 149 of IPC, the Court should consider with even greater care and caution because over implication in the cases is a matter of common knowledge and concern;
viii) While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two factors namely, no prejudice should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation and there should be prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the accused;
ix) The Court to consider reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses or apprehension of threat to the complainant;
(x) Frivolity in prosecution should always be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that shall have to be considered in the matter of grant of bail and in the event of there being some doubt as to the genuineness of the prosecution, in the normal course of events, the accused is entitled to an order of bail.”
I find that it is a fit case to grant pre-arrest bail since it is not a serious offence, and there is no possibility of interfering with the further investigation or jumping bail in the event of release of the petitioner-accused.
6. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Station House Officer, Rajahmundry II Town Police Station, East Godavari District. On such surrender, the Station House Officer, Rajahmundry II Town Police Station, is directed to enlarge the petitioner on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties in a like to the satisfaction of the said SHO.”
//TRUE COPY// To ASSISTANT REGISTRAR For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
1. The VI Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District
2. The Station House Officer, Rajahmundry II Town Police Station, East Godavari District
3. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad (OUT)
4. One CC to Sri T.Nagarjuna Reddy, Advocate (OPUC)
5. one Spare Copy HIGH COURT AB DRAFTED ON 9-5-2014 MSMJ DATE: 8-5-2014 ORDER CRL.P. NO. 4800 OF 2014 DIRECTION
[1] AIR 2008 SC 1551
[2] 2011 Crl.L.J. 3905