Doddi Srikanth v. The State Of A.P

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND SEVENTEEN : PRESENT:

THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9287 of 2017 Between:

Doddi Srikanth, S/o. Naga Sanyasirao Petitioner (Accused No.1 in Cr.No.150/2017 of P.S.Visakhapatnam II Town) AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep .by its Public Prosecutor, High Court Bldgs, Hyderabad, through P.S. Visakhapatnam II Town. Respondent/Prosecution Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioner/A1 on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. 150/2017 on the file of P.S. II Town, Visakhapatnam in the interest of justice. The Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the grounds filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Yallabandi Ramatirtha, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the Addl. Public Prosecutor (AP) for the Respondent, the Court made the following ORDER:

" This petition is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner-A1 for the offence alleged under Section 498-A IPC. 2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner-A1, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State and perused the record. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner-A1 would submit that the petitioner-A1 be given benefit of Section 41-A Cr.P.C. 4.

There is record to show that the marriage between the petitioner-A1 and the de facto complainant was performed on 26.02.2015. Thereafter, the de facto complainant was subjected to dowry harassment to register a house in the name of the petitioner-A1. The petitioner-A1 tortured the de facto complainant both physically and mentally and even she was sexually harassed during menses. There are also other allegations against the petitioner. The allegations are severe. The gravity of the offence is also high. The release of the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. would hinder the investigation. There is possibility of the petitioner winning over the witnesses. There are no merits in the application. 5.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is for the Investigating Officer to issue notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. or not. No direction is required by this Court in that regard. The petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.

6.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed." ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To

1. The VI Additional District Judge-cum-Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Visakhapatnam.

2. The SHO, II Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam.

3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor (AP), High Court, Hyd(OUT)

4. One CC to Sri Yallabandi Ramatirtha, Advocate(OPUC)

5. One spare copy.

SAH

HIGH COURT Dr.SAJ DATED: 15-11-2017

ORDER

CRL.P.NO. 9287 OF 2017 ANTICIPATORY BAIL

DRAFTED BY: SAH APPROVED BY:

DRAFTED ON: 16-11-2017 HIGH COURT Dr.SAJ DATED: 15-11-2017

ORDER

CRL.P.NO. 9287 OF 2017 ANTICIPATORY BAIL