Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19644 (AP)

K SESHAIAH v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

CRLP/5703/2025 · 2025-05-28

Y Lakshmana Rao

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010262802025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5703/2025 Between: K.Seshaiah ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. T.RAMAKOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following Order:- The Criminal Petition has been filedunder Sections 480 and 483 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.2 on bailpursuant to execution of Non Bailable Warrant ( for short ‘NBW’) issued by the learned XIII Additional and Sessions Judge, 2 Narasaraopet, dated 17.01.2025 in Criminal Appeal No.275 of 2023 in Cr.No.311 of 2022 of Chilakaluripet Town Police Station. 2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that A1 and petitioner/A2 aggrieved by conviction and sentence made in C.C.No.170/2023, dated 27.10.2023 by the Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Chilakaluripet preferred the Crl.A.No.275 of 2023. As could be seen from the record, soon after the appeal was numbered A1 and petitioner/A2 did not choose to appear before the appellate Court, as such, on 25.04.2024 the appellate Court issued NBW against the A1 and petitioner/A2. On execution of NBW on 29.06.2024, A1 and petitioner/A2 were produced before the appellate Court and were sent to judicial remand. As per the order in Criminal M.P.No.244 of 2024, dated 09.07.2024, the appellate Court enlarged A1 and petitioner/A2 on bail. On 17.01.2025, when the appeal came up for Judgment as A1 and petitioner/A2 did not choose to appear before the appellate Court, then the appellate Court issued NBW against the A1 and petitioner/A2. On 24.01.2025, petition under Section 70(2) of Cr.P.C. was filed and it dismissed resulting A1 and petitioner/A2 were sent to judicial remand. 3 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/A2 and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 4. Sri T.Ramakoteswara Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner/A2 submits that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 24.01.2025 and the petitioner/A2 has no intention not to appear before the appellate Court on the date of pronouncement of Judgment and the petitioner/A2 would abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court; and urged to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that the petitioner/A2is intentionally did not choose to appear before the appellate Court and urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. As seen from the record, the petitioner/A2 has been in the judicial custody pursuant to the execution of NBW and thus he has been in judicial custody for the past 125 days. The charges framed against the petitioner/A2 are under Sections 323 and 324 of IPC. The petitioner/A2 is resident of Chilakaluripet Town, Palnadu District of Andhra Pradesh. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail with stringent conditions, he would not flee away from the clutches of the law, and interest of the justice would be served. 4 7. Keeping in view of the period of detention undergone by the petitioner/A2 in judicial custody for more than 125 days, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner/A2 on bail with the following stringent conditions. 8. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. The petitioner/A2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to the executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet. ii. The petitioner/A2 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the learned XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Narasaraopet. iii. The petitioner shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. _________________________ DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO 29.05.2025. SDP/SR 5 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO Criminal Petition No.5703 of 2025 Date:29.05.2025 SDP/SR