Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 385 (TS)

Pogula Ramesh v. State of Telangana

2020-03-16

G.SRI DEVI

body2020
ORDER : 1. The petitioner-A1 filed the present application under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking to grant bail to him in Cr. No. 413 of 2019 on the file of Korutla Police Station, Jagtial District, registered for the offences under Sections 302, 324 read with Section 34 IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner/A1 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the 1st respondent-State and perused the record. 3. The case of the prosecution is that on 15.12.2019 at 22.00 hours, the petitioner/A1 along with other accused beat the father of de facto complainant and other three persons with sticks, stones, hands and legs indiscriminately by suspecting them as thieves, who reportedly came to Korutla for catching cats, due to which, the father of de facto complainant died at his house due to internal injuries and other persons sustained bleeding injuries. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/A1 submits that the entire allegations made in the complaint do not constitute the offences alleged against the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is a native of Prakasam Road of Korutla Town and he has not participated in the alleged incident and his name is falsely implicated in the crime. He further submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 17.12.2019 and that the entire investigation is completed except filing of charge sheet. He further submits that the petitioner/shall abide by any condition imposed by this Court. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner/A1. 6. He further submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 17.12.2019 and that the entire investigation is completed except filing of charge sheet. He further submits that the petitioner/shall abide by any condition imposed by this Court. 5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner/A1. 6. As seen from the contents of FIR and 164 Cr.P.C. statements of witnesses, there are specific allegations against the petitioner/A1 that on 15.12.2019 at 21.45 hours, while A1 and A2 were consuming alcohol, they noticed four persons including a boy, and when they asked about their purpose of being there with nets and suspected them as thieves, they grew wild and picked up arguments with the accused, and that out of four persons, one person pushed A1 away, due to which A1 fell down, then, A1 beat him with stick and also picked up a stone and hit the said person on his head, later A1 picked up a stick from the hands of that person and assaulted him on his head, later all the accused beat the deceased and other two persons with sticks and stones, due which, the deceased sustained bleeding injuries and succumbed to the head injury on the same day. As seen from the post mortem report, specific ante-mortem injuries were noted during examination, i.e. laceration on the central part of occipital region of scalp and laceration on the right side occipital region of scalp, which were caused with blunt object. Thus, in view of the nature of injuries found on the dead body of deceased and the manner in which the petitioner/A1 assaulted the deceased, I am not inclined to grant bail to him and his prayer for bail is rejected. 7. Hence, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. 8. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand dismissed.