Mekala Koteshwar Rao, v. State Of Telangana,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.1003 of 2015 ORDER:

The petitioner, who is accused No.1, filed the present application under Sections 437 and 439 Cr.P.C. seeking enlargement on bail in P.R.C.No.175 of 1994 on the file of the II Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar. charge sheet came to be filed against the petitioner and others in Crime No.287 of 1989 of Saroornagar Police Station, registered for an offence punishable under Section 395 IPC.

The allegations in the charge sheet are that on 12.05.1989 at about 1.30 a.m. after the police party who were on patrolling duty left the petrol bunk, five unknown offenders coming from the back side, out of which two of them caught hold of one Madhusudhan Reddy and the remaining three entered into the petrol bunk and on point of knife took away Rs.12,000/- from the table drawer. Basing on these allegations the above case came to be registered. Subsequently, the petitioner was arrested on 13.08.1989 in Crime No.481 of 1989 of Saroornagar Police Station, registered for an offence punishable under Section 392 IPC. On interrogation he confessed about the commission of offences in this crime, in Crime No.345 of 1989 of Saroornagar Police registered for an offence punishable under sections 398 and 353 IPC and also in Crime No.108 of 1989 of Vanasthalipuram Police Station, registered for an offence punishable under Section 393 IPC.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. The material discloses that the petitioner was arrested and released on bail on 19.09.1989. Thereafter, the prosecution completed the investigation and filed charge sheet on 26.09.1989. Pursuant to the non-bailable warrant issued against the petitioner, he was arrested on 16.01.2015 and remanded to judicial custody. Since the petitioner evaded the process of law for nearly 25 years leading to stalling the entire proceedings, I see no reason to grant bail to the petitioner though the co-accused were tried separately. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the learned Magistrate concerned is advised to take all steps in committing the case to the Court of Sessions and the learned Sessions Judge is advised dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible on day today basis.

_________________________ JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR 25.02.2015 gkv