AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This is an application under S. 439, Cr.P.C. filed by A-1, A-2, A-7 and A-12 in Sessions Case No. 220 of 1990 on the file of the I Additional Sessions Judge, Cuddapah praying this court to release them on bail.
Earlier also the petitioners filed applications for bail before the Sessions Court, Cuddapah and also before this court but the same were dismissed. A perusal of the order of the Court below shows that as many as five applications have been filed by the petitioners with a similar request and the same were rejected. Now as the things stand to-day, the Sessions Case was posted for trial on 16-9-1991 but the case was adjourned to 11-11-1991 because the examination of the prosecution witnesses could not be conducted as they were not present.
Now, in this petition, A-1 submits that he filed a nomination to contest for the Bye-election to the Lok Sabha from Cuddapah constituency and hence he may be released on bail. His further case is that all the accused persons were in jail since May, 1990 i.e. for the last 17 months.
The case of the prosecution is that it is a brutal double murder case which took place on 24-4-1990 at Moragudi bus stop in which the accused 1 to 2 armed themselves with iron pipes and hunting sickles waylaid at Moragudi and in furtherance of their common object stopped the bus, trespassed into it, hacked the deceased No. 1 T. Venkata Subba Reddy with a hunting sickle, dragged him out of the bus and done to death by inflicting injuries with hunting sickles. The accused also surrounded A. Gangi Reddy son of Rami Reddy and done to death by causing injuries with hunting sickles. The accused also caused injuries to N. Bail Reddy (complainant) and T. Hanumanna. The overt acts attributed to them are that A-1 hacked with the hunting sickle on the head of T. Venkata Subba Reddy, and dragged him down from the bus; A-2 hacked with the hunting sickle on T. Venkata Subba Reddy''s head : A-7 and A-12 and two others armed with hunting sickles charged A. Gangi Reddy, deceased No. 2, and overtook him in the restha leading to Moragudi village and A-12 cut with the hunting sickle on the back of the head of A. Gangi Reddy twice and A. Gangi Reddy fell down. A-7 cut with the hunting sickle on the neck of A. Gangi Reddy and on the left shoulder of A. Gangi Reddy, So the overt acts that are attributed to A-1, A-2, A-7, and A-12 are with deadly weapons and on vital parts of deceased Nos. 1 and 2 and it is a case of doubt murder.
Except these petitioners, the other accused have been released on bail. The case is ripe for trial. With regard to the nature of the allegations that have been made against these accused, there is no charge-sheet also.
Sri E. Ella Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, contends that A-1 being the person contesting for Lok Sabha elections as a candidate, he may be released on bail. Filing of a nomination and contesting the elections to be the Lok Sabha as candidate is not at all a ground that can be taken into account to release A-1 on bail particularly when he is involved in a double murder case and was attributed with fatal injuries on the vital parts of the deceased A-1 also was involved in nine other criminal cases.
The learned Public Prosecutor submits that there are ill-feelings between both the groups and if the accused are released on bail, there is every likelihood of danger to the life of the accused and the accused can also threaten the witnesses and tamper with the evidence. He further submits that there is imminent threat to the law and order problem in the village if these accused are released on bail. When on the facts the court comes to the conclusion that this is not a fit case to release the petitioners on bail, mere filing of a nomination to contest the Lok Sabha elections cannot be said to be circumstance which can be considered for releasing A-1 on bail.
Sri E. Ella Reddy, the learned counsel further submits that one Tulasi Reddy, a Rajya Sabha member was released on bail in a different case on the ground that he has to attend the sitting of the Rajya Sabha. In that case, the allegation against Sri Tulasi Reddy was that he was charged for the offence under S. 120B, IPC and only one witness was there and that witness also kept quiet for ten days without revealing the same. Taking that fact into account and as no prima facie case has been made out against the said Tulasi Reddy under S. 120B, IPC on the basis of the material placed by the prosecution, this court came to the conclusion that he is entitled for the grant of bail. This court also took into consideration the additional ground that he is a sitting member of the Rajya Sabha and therefore he was also permitted to appear at the meetings of the Rajya Sabha.
In this case A-1 filed a nomination to contest for the Lok Sabha seat from the Cuddapah constituency and the same was also accepted by the authorities concerned. But I feel that filing of a nomination to contest for the elections is not a ground by itself to release the accused on bail. If on facts a case is made our for releasing him on bail, then this additional factor of filing a nomination to contest elections can be considered as an additional ground. Since A-1''s applications have been rejected by this court as well as the Sessions Court on the ground that he is not entitled to be released on bail, in view of the overt acts attributed to him and the grave offence involved the question of consideration the application of A-1 on the additional ground does not arise. The circumstances under which a sitting Member of the Rajya Sabha is whose case, a prima facie case has been made that he is entitled to be released on bail cannot be equally applicable to the case of A-1. It is also brought to the notice of this court that as many as 9 other criminal cases are pending against A-1.
No changed circumstances have been brought out for releasing the other petitioners on bail.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
Petition dismissed.