HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN :PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO CRL.P.NO:6025 of 2014 Between:
Smt. Singam Jaya Kiran W/o.S.Ravi Kumar, . Petitioner/Accused No.2 AND The State of Telangana, Rep., by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana, and the State of A.P., Hyderabad.
. Respondent/Complainant Petition under Sections 437 & 439 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 enlarge the petitioner on bail in Connection with Crime No.151 of 2013 on the file of the P.S.CCS DD. WCO Team VI, Hyderabad..
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the grounds filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Harinath Reddy Soma, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Addl. Public Prosecutor, for the Respondent, the Court made the following.
ORDER:
“This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 437 and 439 Cr.P.C by the petitioner/accused No.2 in Crime No.151 of 2013, on the file of the Station House Officer, CCS Police Station, DD, WCO.T.VI., Hyderabad, registered against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 465 read with Section 120(B) of IPC.
2. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent-State and perused the material placed on record.
3. The petitioner is A2 among the two accused of the crime registered against them for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 465 read with Section 120(B) of IPC in saying they collected a sum of Rs.2,25,40,000/- from public by luring under the guise of running a travelling agency and inviting the subscribers to invest the amount for purchase of TOYOTO and INNOVA cars in the name of investors and to return the money with double amount within six months for them so investing. All the offences are punishable below 10 years. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 24.04.2014 to say more than sixty days and charge-sheet is not filed so far. She was already taken to police custody purusant to the order of the learned Magistrate from 29-04-2014 to 01-05- 2014 for the purpose of interrogation in investigating the case. The petitioner also furnished copies of properties owned by her to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor with particulars and full address. By taking into consideration of these facts, bail is granted to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:-
[1] Petitioner/accused shall execute a self-bond for Rs.25,000/- [Rupees twenty five thousand only] with two sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The bond to be obtained is not only to appear before the Court of Sessions or by virtue of any transfer of proceedings for want of jurisdiction or otherwise before any other Court and even after trial before such Court to appear before revisional or appellate Court or other superior Court - vide decision-Pre-Legal Aid Committee, Jamshedpur vs State of Delhi 1982[2]APLJ 43(SC); so that at stage of committal or other proceedings obtaining of fresh bond from accused and even affidavits of sureties of bonds and solvency earlier produced are ratifying and in existence and enforceable, without even insisting his further presence, serves the purpose. Such recourse quickens the proceedings at such committal or other stages without loss of time and it also to some extent complies with the requirement of Section 437A CrPC.
[2] Petitioner/accused shall report before the Station House Officer, CCS Police Station, DD, WCO.T.VI., Hyderabad, on every Sunday in the evening between 6 to 7 p.m. till further orders for assurance of his availability and non-interference in any manner with the witnesses.
[3] Petitioner/accused shall not enter the area where the victim and witnesses reside, until further orders being passed by the learned trial Judge relaxing the same empowering him by virtue of this order.
[4] Petitioner/accused shall attend before the Court of law regularly in enquiry and trial without fail, if not their bail shall be cancelled forthwith, without any further order so that, the learned Judge can also issue NBW by cancelling the bail from the power under section 439 [2] CrPC. delegated to the learned Judge by this order during pendency of proceedings before the learned Judge.
[5] Petitioner/accused shall not leave the State pending enquiry/trial without prior permission of the Court of the learned trial Judge.
[6] Petitioner/accused shall furnish her full address with property and Bank Account particulars and submit her passport if any, after enlargement of bail on the next hearing date before the Magistrate Court concerned (for collecting by police as part of his duty to investigate-also the means of accused and to furnish the same in the final report of investigation to enable the trial court in the event of considering the need of awarding compensation under section 357 CrPC. So to award from such material and evidence, apart from securing presence and obtaining of bond with sureties under section 437A CrPC. etc.), failing which it is open to the learned Judge concerned by virtue of the power conferred by this order to cancel the bail.
[7] The bail now granted is since a regular one till end of trial (without prejudice to the right to cancel meanwhile in case of need and/or for non- compliance of conditions supra) any absence of petitioner as accused for hearing/enquiry or trial, issuance of non bailable warrant-NBW (unless cancelled before execution) and even its execution and production of accused as per the NBW; that does not tantamount to cancellation of bail including from the wording of Sec.439(2) CrPC. and as such in such event no fresh bail application can be entertained. As it tantamounts to only cancellation of bail bonds earlier executed, (leave about the power of the court to issue surety notices by forfeiting bonds and for imposing penalty on the bonds forfeited); the proper course is to direct the accused to work out the remedy to pay penalty on the previous forfeited bonds as per Section 441 to 446 CrPC. and to submit fresh solvency with self bond for enlarging her by release from custody on payment of penalty of the earlier bonds forfeited without need of enforcing against earlier sureties again.”
//TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To
1. The XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.
2. The Station House Officer, Police Station, CCS, DD, Hyderabad.
3. The Superintendent, Chenchalguda Central Prison, Hyderabad.
4. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad.
5. One CC to Sri Harinath Reddy Soma, Advocate (OPUC)
6. One spare Copy HIGH COURT AB DRAFTED ON 26-6-2014 DR.SSRBJ DATE: 25-6-2014 ORDER CRL.P. NO. 6025 OF 2014 BAIL