APHC010349112024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: Between: Gurram Nagaraju Jetti Sudhakar Chowdary and Others Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. P NAGENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. HARISH KUMAR RASINENI 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following By order dated 13.06.2023 of Cases under the Scheduled Castes and (Prevention of Atrocities) and Sessions Judge, Ananthap allowed the Crl.M.P.No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5632/2024 ...PETITIONER AND Jetti Sudhakar Chowdary and Others ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: P NAGENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): HARISH KUMAR RASINENI PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Court made the following order: By order dated 13.06.2023, learned Special Court for Trial Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tr (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989-cum-VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ananthapuramu District at Ananthapuramu P.No.424 of 2023, granting anticipatory bail in [3327] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENTS for Trial Scheduled Tribes VIII Additional District District at Ananthapuramu , granting anticipatory bail in 2 favour of 1st respondent directing that in the event of arrest, 1st respondent be released on bail on execution of self bond for Rs.20,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Uravakonda. 2. The present Criminal petition has been filed for cancellation of bail on the ground that 1st respondent/accused is not cooperating with the investigation and because of the said reason, the police could not complete the investigation and file charge sheet. 3. Perused the order dated 13.06.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge. The petitioner/de facto complainant is the son-in- law of 1st respondent/accused. The subject crime was registered for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC. The allegation is that the accused made a casual visit to the house of de facto complainant and took away Tata Nexon XM (S) Car bearing Reg. No. AP39 KD 5409 from his possession by stealing keys from his house. The learned Special Judge observed that on verification of bank statement and counterfoils, which were filed by the accused along with bail application, the Tata Nexon XM(S) Motor 3 Car was purchased by the accused in favour of de facto complainant and he was paying EMIs regularly to the said car through his account. 4. The present Criminal Petition is filed seeking cancellation of bail on the ground that since the accused is not cooperating with the investigation for recovery of the car, the police are not in a position to file the charge sheet. The petitioner/de facto complainant and the accused are closely related to each other. It appears that merely because the Car that was purchased by the father-in-law has not been given to the accused, the present petition has been filed for cancellation of anticipatory bail. Since the grounds urged do not fall within the parameters of cancellation of anticipatory bail, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Criminal Petition. 5. Accordingly, Criminal Petition is dismissed. _____________________________ JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY 06.02.2025 Tjn/anr 4 426 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SREENIVASA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No. 5632 OF 2024 06.02.2025 Tjn/anr