Tadikonda Saradhi v. The State Of Ap

SMT JUSTI CE T. RAJANI CRI MI NAL PETI TI ON No.1 0 7 7 of 2 0 1 8 ORDER:

This petition is filed seeking for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who is the accused, in Crime No.293 of 2017 on the file of the Station House Officer, Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad. The offences alleged are under Sections 420, 493 IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short 'the Act'). 2.

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

3.

The allegation against this petitioner is that he had a love affair with the de facto complainant and later he refused to marry her on the ground that she belongs to lower caste (mala) and his marriage was fixed with another lady. When the de facto complainant went and met that lady and informed her about the relationship between the petitioner and herself, the petitioner threatened her with dire consequences.

4.

Considering the nature of the allegations and the allegations constituting an offence under the Act, this Court is precluded from granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner as Section 18 of the Act comes in the way of granting anticipatory bail.

5.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the police are directed to issue notice under Section 41A of

Cr.P.C. by following the guidelines enunciated by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and another (Crl.Appeal No.1277 of 2014) 1, As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ T. RAJANI , J February 7, 2018 LMV 1 (2014) 8 SCC 273