Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 429 (AP)

K. S. Anil Kumar v. State Of Andhra Pradesh

2020-06-18

CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

body2020
JUDGMENT Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J. - This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest. 2. The petitioner is A-3 in Crime No.19 of 2020 of T. Sundur Police Station, Guntur District. 3. The alleged offence against him is under Section 307 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "I.P.C."). 4. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner herein along with other accused has attacked the two injured persons in this case with iron rods and sticks and caused injuries to them and thereby attempted to kill them and committed the aforesaid offence. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the other accused in this case surrendered before the police and they were arrested and thereafter they were released on bail. Therefore, he would submit that the petitioner is also similarly placed and thereby prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to him. 7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the Criminal Petition. He would submit that the other accused on their surrender, were arrested and thereafter they were released on bail. So, the petitioner, who is seeking anticipatory bail, is not similarly placed. He would submit that specific overt acts are made against the petitioner stating that he has attacked one of the injured with iron rod and caused grievous injuries to him. Therefore, he is not entitled to anticipatory bail. 8. Perused the record. 9. As rightly stated by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the facts of the case show that there are specific overt acts made against the petitioner in commission of the offence. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner herein attacked one of the injured in this case with iron rod and caused grievous injuries to him on his head. The injured was in hospital for about twenty (20) days. Therefore, the accusation made against the petitioner is prima facie well founded, as he has used a lethal weapon like iron rod and caused grievous injuries on his head. A clear prima facie case is made out against him. The injured was in hospital for about twenty (20) days. Therefore, the accusation made against the petitioner is prima facie well founded, as he has used a lethal weapon like iron rod and caused grievous injuries on his head. A clear prima facie case is made out against him. So, having regard to the serious nature of the offence, this Court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to him. 10. The mere fact that the other accused were surrendered before the police and they were arrested and thereafter they were released on bail, cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail to this petitioner, as he is not similarly placed with the other accused, who were arrested and released on bail. 11. Therefore, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.