Merreddy Matta Reddy Ashok Reddy v. The State Of Telangana

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11331 OF 2022 Between:

1. Merreddy Matta Reddy @ Ashok Reddy @ Sathi Reddy @ Badri @ A V Ramana S/o. lndrasena Narsimha Reddy

2. Mohammed Khaja Moinddin, S/o. I\/asthan Vali

3. Burri Bikhsapathi, S/o. Ramulu ..,PETITIONERS AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

...RESPONDENT Petition under Section 437 & 439 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 release the petitioners on bail in connection with Crime No.75 ol 2022 of Ibrahimpatanam Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate in SC No.402 of 2022 on the file of lllrd Addl. District Judge, at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Pappu Nageshwar Senior Counsel rep. for M/s V. MYTHILI ,Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER

HON,BLE' DT. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA CRIMINAL PETITION No. 1 1331 of 2022 ORDER:

1. Heard Sri Pappu Nageshwar Rao, learned Senior Counsel who argued on behalf of Smt.V.Mythili, learned counsel on record for the petitioners. Also heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor who is representing the Respondent-State.

2.

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioners, who are arrayed as Accused Nos.1 to 3 in S.C.No.4O2 of 2022, on the file of the Court of III Additional District Judge, L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

3. The allegations that are levelled against the l"t petitioner are that he committed offences punishable under Sections 3O2, l2O-8, 419, 42O, 468, 471, 109 r/w.34 IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act. The allegations that are levelled against the petitioner Nos.2 & 3 are that they committed offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 3O2 r /w.34 IPC and Sections 25 &, 27 of Arms Act.

Dt.CSL) Crl.P.No.r1331 ol 2022 4.

Making his submission, the learned Senior Counsel contended that the petitioners have not committed any offences whatsoever. Learned counsel submits that as per the version of the prosecution, the petitioners killed one N.Srinivas Reddy and one K.Raghavendar Reddy and indeed, there are many enemies for those persons and it is not known who killed those persons. Learned counsel also submits that while disposing Cr1.P.No.7204 of 2022, tl:ris Court, through order dated 23.O8.2022 (Sri Justice K.Surender) directed the trial Court to dispose of the Sessions Case within a period of four months. But the trial Court is holding incharge of three other Courts and therefore, the trial Court could not dispose of the Sessions Case within the period ordered and therefore, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

5.

l,earned counsel also submits that the petitioners should assist him for subjecting the prosecution witnesses to cross-examination and the petitioners, who are in judicial custody, are unable to pass required information so that he would cross-examine the prosecution witnesses

( Dt.CSLJ C.l.P,No.71331 oI 2022 effectively and therefore, the petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

6.

Seriouslv opposing the relief sought for, learned Additional Public Prosecutor states that already schedule is fixed for trial of case and four witnesses were examined till now. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also states that within a montl-r, the trial would be completed and therefore, it is not desirable to enlarge the petitioners on bail at this stage. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also contended that the lst petitioner, who is the prime accused, is in the habit of changing his identity and he changed his narne as Ashok Reddy ald thereafter as Sathireddy and thereafter as Badri ald thereafter as A.V.Ramana and he has got previous criminal history also and incase, the said person is enla:-gcd on bai1, he would flee from justice and would not be available. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also contended that the petitioners brutally killed two persons and created panic in the society Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also contended that the petitioners may pose threat to the prosecution witnesses and the prosecution witnesses would not be in a

a Dt.CSL) Crl.P.N o.11331 of 2O22 position to depose in a free and fair manner before the Court in case the petitioners are enlarged on bail ald thus, the trial Court proceedings would be hampered and when the trial proceedings are at the crucial stage, the petitioner cannot be enlarged on bail. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also stated that scientific investigation \\,AS done and crucial information was collected to show and establish the presence of the petitioners near the scene of offence along with the deceased.

7. The contents of the charge sheet revea-ls grave allegations against the petitioners. Further, as per the contents of the charge sheet, the l"t petitioner is having previous criminal history and he was involved in bank cheating cases. It is also mentioned that to escape from legal proceedings, in the year 2OO7, he charrged his name as Ashok Reddy and after getting his name changed, he evaded to attend the Court due to which the cases were registered as Long Pending Cases (LPC). That apart, as per the version of the prosecution, the petitioners, by use of fire arms, attacked two persons and killed them brutally. Also, AS submitted, the trial is in progress. Though the

--:--7 Dt.CSL) Crl,P.No.11331 ol 2022 iearned senior counsel for the petitioners contended that the presence of the petitioners outside the jail is essential to glve instructions to him for cross-examining the witnesses, Rules and Regulations are already framed for the learned Advocates to contact the Under Trial Prisoners, have Mulakat and get instructions. Therefore, the said ground cannot be taken into consideration for grant of bail.

8. Having considered the grievousness in the allegations, the stagc of trial proceedings and the apprehension of the Investigating Agency, this Court is of the view that the request of the petitioners cannot be honoured.

9.

Resultantly, the Criminal petition is dismissed. 1 Sd/. C. PRAVEEN KUMAR ASSISTANJ REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// se[*3ru oFFrcER To,

1. The Illrd Additional District Judge, L.B' Nagar, Ranga Reddy District'

2. The Principal Junior civil Judge-cum-XV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, lbrahimPatnam

3. The Station House Officer, lbrahimpatnam Police Station, lbrahimpatnam, R.R. District.

4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad[OUT]

5. Two CD Copies

6. One CC to SMT. V.MYTHILI Advocate IOPUC] VH q

HIGH COURT Dr. CSL, J DATED: 3011212022 TIE STA it:

ORDER

t) 2 3 rAil ztm .a i'

CRLP.No.11331 o12022 Dismissing the Criminal Petition tr"--\*