IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS: 457 & 458 OF 2025 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 457 OF 2025 APHC010345562025 Appeal under Section 14-A of the SC’s & ST’s POA Act, aggrieved by the order dated 03-07-2025 passed in CrI.M.P. No. 581 of 2025 in Cr. No. 258/2021 of Gospadu P.S. in SCSTSC No. 196/2021 on the file of Special Judge For Trial Of Cases Under SCs & STs (PoA) ACT -CUM- VI Additional Sessions Court, Kurnool. Between: Ambati Satish Reddy, S/o. Gopal Reddy, Aged about 33 years, R/o. Gospadu Village and Mandal, Nandyal District (erstwhile Kurnool), Andhra Pradesh. ...APPELLANT/ACCUSED N0.4 itx. AND of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Allagada, Kurnool District, through Public Prosecutor at High court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. The State ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ; SRI V NITESH Counsel for the Petitioner Counsel for the Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 458 OF 2025 APHC010345832025 BE 14-A of the SC’s & ST’s POA Act, aggrieved by Appeal under Section the order dated 03-07-2025 passed in CrI.M.P. No. 581 of 2025 in Cr.No.258/2021 of Gospadu P.S. in SCSTSC No.196/2021 on the file of For Trial of Cases Under SCs & STs (PoA) Act-cum-VI Special Judge Additional Sessions Court, Kurnool. Between: Dudekula Talari Bala Gokari @ Pedda Gokari, S/o. Pullaiah, Age 30 Occ; Coolie, R/o. Gospadu Village and ’Mindal, Nandyal District years, (erstwhile Kurnool), Andhra Pradesh. ...APPELLANT/ACCUSED N0.2 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Kurnool District, through Public Prosecutor at High court of Allagada Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI V NITESH Counsel for the Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following COMMON JUDGMENT : APHC010345562025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [0] // THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT I HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos: 457 & 458/2025 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 457/2025: Between: 1.AMBATI SATISH REDDY, S/0. GOPAL REDDY, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, RJO. GOSPADU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE KURNOOL), ANDHRA PRADESH. ...APPELLANT AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Allagada, Kurnool District, through Public Prosecutor at High court of Andhra Pradesh,Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High Court may be pleased to may be pleased to allow the present criminal appeal and set aside the order dated 03-07-2025 passed in CrI.M.P. No. 581 of 2025 in Or. No. 258/2021 of Gospadu P.S. in SCSTSC No. 196/2021 on the file of Hon’ble Special Judge For Trial Of Cases Under SCs & STs (PoA) ACT - CUM- VI Additional Sessions Court, Kurnool in so far Appellant herein/accused no.4 and consequently enlarge the appellant herein/accused no.2 on bail pending trial and enquiry in SCSTSC No. 196 of 2021,on the file of Hon’ble Special Judge For Trial Of Cases Under SCs & STs (PoA) ACT - CUM- VI Additional Sessions Court, Kurnool, Kurnool district and pass Counsel for the Appellant: /■ r'^ 2 1.VNITESH Counsel for the Respondent: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 458/2025: Between: 1.DUDEKULA TALARI BALA GOKARI ALIAS PEDDA GOKARI, S/0. PULLAIAH, AGE 30 YEARS, OCOCOOLIE, R/0. GOSPADU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE KURNOOL), ANDHRA PRADESH. ...APELLANT AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Allagada, Kurnool District, through Public Prosecutor at High court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. ...RESPODENT Appeal under Section 372/374(2)/378(4) of Cr.P.C praying that the High Court may be pleased to pleased to allow the present criminal appeal and set aside the order dated 03-07-2025 passed in CrI.M.P. No. 581 of 2025 in Cr. No. 258/2021 of Gospadu P.S. in SCSTSC No. 196/2021 on the file of Hon’ble Special Judge For Trial Of Cases Under SCs & STs (PoA) ACT - GUM- VI Additional Sessions Court, herein/accused no.2 and consequently enlarge the appellant herein/accused no.2 on bail pending trial and enquiry in SCSTSC No. 196 of 2021 on the file of Hon’ble Special Judge For Trial Qf Cases Under SCs & STs (PoA) ACT - CUM- VI Additional Sessions Court, Kurnool, Kurnool district and Counsel for the Appellant: 1.VNITESH Counsel for the Respondent: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: Kurnool in so far appellant pass 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos: 457 & 458/2025 COMMON JUDGMENT: The present Criminal Appeals i.e., CrI.A.Nos. 457 and 458 of 2025 have been preferred by the Appellants herein/Accused Nos.4 and 2 respectively against the order of the learned Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs & STs (POA) Act-cum-VI Additional Sessions Court, Kurnool, in Cri.M.P.No.581 of 2025 dated 03.07.2025 rejecting the bail application in Crime No. 258 of 2021 of Gosapadu Police Station in S.C.S.T.S.C.No. 196 of 2021. 2. Since the subject matter in the present appeals is one and the same, at the request of the learned Counsel representing both sides, these matters are heard together and passed the following common Judgment. 3. Heard Sri V.Nitesh, learned Counsel for the Appellants herein/Accused Nos. 2 and 4 and Ms. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 4. Learned Counsel for the Appellants herein would submit that the Appellants herein were granted Regular Bail. The matter is coming up for hearing on charges before the Trial Court in S.C.S.T.S.C.No. 196 of 2021 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs & STs (POA) Act-cum-VI Additional Sessions Court, Kurnool. On 10.06.2025, the Appellants herein/Accused Nos. 2 and 4 could not appear before the Trial Court due to their personal reasons. Unfortunately, the learned Counsel also ^ did not represent the matter by filing absent petition, due to which, the learned Trial Judge issued Non-Bailable Warrant against the Appellants herein/Accused Nos. 2 and 4. On execution of such Non-Bailable Warrant, the Appellants herein were produced before the Trial Court on 19.06.2025 and they were sent to Judicial Custody again. Learned Counsel for the Appellants herein would further submit that the Appellants herein are facing the allegations relating to the offence under Section 353 r/w 34 of I.P.C., and Section 3 (1)(r)(s) of SC’s/ST’s (POA) Amendment Act, 2015. Learned Counsel for the Appellants herein would further submit that the absence of the Appellants herein/Accused Nos. 2 and 4 on the given date is not deliberate, but due to some health reasons. The matter is coming up for hearing on the charges. Hence, the present of the Appellants herein on that particular date is not essential. Learned Counsel for the Appellants herein would further submit that the Appellants herein/ Accused Nos. 2 and 4 immediately moved a bail application in CrI.M.P.No. 581 of 2025, which was dismissed by the learned Trial Judge on 03.07.2025. Learned Counsel for the Appellants herein would further submit that they are ready to furnish the sureties to the satisfaction of the Court and they may be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the appeal and would submit that the Court may pass appropriate Judgment according to law. 5 Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material 6. placed on record, the Appellants herein are facing Trial for the offence punishable under Section 353 r/w 34 of I.P.C., and Section 3 (1)(r)(s) of SC’s/ST’s (POA) Amendment Act, 2015. While so, on 10.06.2025, they could not appear before the Trial Court when the matter is coming up for hearing on charges, due to which, the learned Trial Judge issued Non-Bailable Warrant against the Appellants herein/Accused Nos. 2 and 4, since no petition has been moved before the Court seeking condonation of their absence. On execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant, the Appellants were produced before the Court on 19.06.2025. Since then, they have been in Judicial Custody. The fact remains that the Appellants were released on regular bail considering the fact and circumstances of the case. In that view, keeping them in custody is not required. Furthermore, the presence of the Appellants on 10.06.2025 is not warranted since the matter is coming up for hearing on charges. The Court can hear the prosecution as well as the defense counsel and can frame the charges on the given date. When their presence is not essential, giving Non- Bailable Warrant for their absence on that single date is not correct. 7. In that view, the impugned order is set aside with regard to Accused Nos. 2 and 4 and these Criminal Appeals are allowed by enlarging the Appellants/Accused Nos. 2 and 4 on bail on the following condition: i. The Appellants/Accused Nos. 2 and 4 shall execute personal bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court. 6 7. In the result, the Criminal Appeals are allowed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. 3 SD/- E.KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. The Special Judge For Trial of Cases under SCs & STs (PoA) ACT - cum- VI Additional Sessions Court: Kurnool, Kurnool District.(with records) 2. The Superintendent, Kurnool District Jail, Kurnool District. 3. I he Station House Officer, Gospadu Police Station, Kurnool District. 4. One CC to Sri V Nitesh Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CC's to The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amafavati [OUT] The Section Ofcr, Criminal Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. ’ : ^' 7. THree db^Qobies SAM / v - TAC r HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 COMMON JUDGMENT CRLA Nos. 457 & 458 OF 2025 allowing these criminal appeals