Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 47853 (AP)

B. BHARATH CHANDD v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

CRLP/11998/2025 · 2025-11-18

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010603512025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11998/2025 Between: 1. B. BHARATH CHANDD, S/O. P. GOVINDAIAH, AGE 16 YRS, R/O. D.NO. 1-1, T. VADDURU, PALAMANER MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. 2. B. AKASH,, S/O LATE B. VENKATESH, AGE 18 YRS, R/O. D.NO. 1- 181, T. VADDURU, PALAMANER MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI. 2. THE VICTIM, THE VICTIM ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to set aside the order dt. 27.10.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No. 477/2025 in Crl.A.No. 109/2024 on the file of I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Chittoor District at Chittoor and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. D PURNACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 2 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11998/2025 ORDER: The instant Criminal Petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 8BNSS9) has been filed by the Petitioners, seeking to set aside the Order dated 27.10.2025 passed by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chittoor District at Chittoor in Crl.M.P.No.477 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.109 of 2024. 2. Heard Sri D.Purna Chandra Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the Petitioners have been convicted for the offences under Sections 448, 342, 376(2)(f), 376(DB) r/w 34 of IPC and Section 6 r/w 5(g)(m) and (n) of POCSO Act, 2012 before the Juvenile Justice Board, wherein the sentence imposed against the Petitioners was suspended by the learned Juvenile Justice Board. Aggrieved by such conviction, the Petitioners preferred an appeal which is pending before the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chittoor District at Chittoor in Crl.A.No.109 of 2024. He would further submit that the Petitioners herein have engaged a Counsel who filed an application seeking suspension of sentence before the Appellate Court. Unfortunately, the Counsel died and the Petitioners due to inadvertence, could not appear before the Appellate Court to pursue their application for suspension of sentence. Thereafter, they 4 have come to know about the death of their Counsel and they have filed Crl.M.P.No.477 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.109 of 2024 before the Appellate Court and that was dismissed on the ground that the Petitioners jumped bail after obtaining Order of suspension of sentence by the Juvenile Justice Board. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that the Court may pass appropriate Orders. 5. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the impugned Order passed by the Appellate Court, as rightly put by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, the petition was dismissed for the reason that the Petitioners have jumped bail which was granted by the Juvenile Justice Board after conviction. It appears that there was no deliberate intention on the part of the Petitioners to jump bail, but that it occurred only due to lack of communication arising from the death of the Counsel on record. Taking into consideration the fact that the Petitioners are pursuing their studies, keeping them in the Observation Home upon conviction, when their bail is pending before the Appellate Court, would not serve any purpose. In that view, the impugned Order is hereby quashed. Learned Appellate Judge is directed to suspend the sentence passed against the Petitioners by imposing suitable conditions to secure their presence as and when required. 6. In the result, this Criminal Petition is allowed. 5 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 19.11.2025. UPS 6 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11998/2025 Dated.19.11.2025 UPS 152