P Balu Or Balu Naik v. The State Of Telangana

HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.7737 of 2019 ORDER :

Petitioner, who is the accused in Cr.No.116 of 2019 on the file of the S.H.O. Chandampet Police Station, Nalgonda District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 419, 464, 465 and 468 IPC, filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent State.

3.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is working as a computer operator at MRO Office, Chandampet and he illegally made the entries of the Government land in Sy.No.50 an 133 of Kambalapally village and Pogila villages of Chandampet mandal in favour of illegal pattedars and he helped corresponding periods of Tahsildars. Hence, the complaint.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the police have registered the case on the basis of the report, which is a two line letter without enclosing the letter of District Collector, which is referred in the letter of the Tahsildar. He further submits that there are no details of the offence as to who perpetrated the offence and the details of the documents issued by the office illegally. He

further submits that the police have mentioned various offences of IPC in the FIR without the details of the allegations and nature of the case. He further submits that the petitioner is a law abiding citizen and he is ready to abide by the terms and conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State vehemently opposed the bail application by contending that several cases have been filed against all the accused, who have been indulged in commission of crimes and several documents have been collected during the course of investigation, which show the role of the petitioner in the crime and hence, the petitioner is not entitled for bail.

6. Looking into the nature of allegations leveled against the petitioner and also taking into consideration the gravity of offence alleged against the petitioner and the involvement of the petitioner in the crime, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI DATED: 30.12.2019.

Hsd