P.N.Suresh v. The State Of Telangana

13251 |

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD MONDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW THREE i I PRESENT I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER i CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11333 OF 2023 I Between:

!

1. P.N.Suresh, S/o. Late P.N.Venkata Siva Sarma, Aged about 58 years, Occ Business, R/o. Flat No.304, Greenspace D Bloc Puppalaguda, Manikonda, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

2. Urul Reddy, s/O. Patolla Narsimha Reddy, Aged about 40 years, Occ Business, R/o. H.No.5-38, Kollur Village, Sadasivapet Mandal, Medak District. I I ...PETITIONERNo. l&2 AND '1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hydrabad ...RESPONDENT No.{

2. Sub Divisional Police Officer, at Sanga Reddy, Sanga Reddy Districl.

3. Yelimela Pramod, S/o. V. Somaiah, Age Major, Occ Business, Rl/o. H.No.112, Kolluru Village, Ramachandrapuram, Sanga Reddy District ...RESPONDENT No.2/DEFACTO COIIP!-AINANT/R3 Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Grant ANTICIPATORY BAIL to the Petitioners in the event of their arrest in unnumbered crime on the file of Sub-Divisional Police Officer at Sanga Reddy on the complaint lodged by the De-facto complainant Respondent No. 3. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri NARASIMHULU K.B, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and of None appeared for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K,SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION No. 11333 OF 2023 ORDER:

1.

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 and 2 seeking to grant anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in unnumbered crime on the file of Sub-Divisional Police Ofhcer at Sanga Reddy, on the complaint lodged by the de facto complainant/respondent No.3. 2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Fublic Prosecutor for the responden t-State and perused the record.

3.

lrarned counsel for the petitioners would submit that since the petitioners have filed a complaint against the de facto complainant, which was registered as crime, a false complaint is I filed by the de facto complainant against them making out the I caste issues.

4.

According to the petitioners, the complaint lodged by the de facto complainant was not registered. In the complaint, the de facto complainant is alleging offences under Sections SCs/ STs Act. The said complaint was filed only to pressurize these

!

\ - '--'-asu \ '-rr t petitioners to settle the issues with regard to the complaint lodged by them.

5.

Since there is a case already filed by the petitioners against the de facto complainant, the police are directed to follow the procedure laid down under Section 41-A Cr'P'C and also the guidelines formulated by the Honble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar tt. State of Bihart scrupulously, in the event of registration of crime against these petitioners' The petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating Oflicer by furnishing informationanddocumentsaSsoughtinconcludingthe investigation.

6.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed off.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed' Sd,. MODH.

MAIL ASSISTANT RE /ITRUE COPY/'

SECTION OFFICER '1H:tf"',1H".i1,,i*'pgllul';#ts":'rfl ',T-i?*ifl i,li::#gT."'

i fwo CCs to Public Pr( - 3'.1%t?i !?Y'nlo*o'''*"u' K B' Advocate roPUCl

5. Two CD Copies DL -\.P

HIGH COURT DATED:2011112023 1$6 Sr ATf oA v o5 q a ? g r'tlj\l 2t23

ORDER

CRLP.No.11333 of 2023 1'.

lc t.:pA1C.

Crl.P is disposed off s 1b u{