GUMMALLA SIVA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
LAWS(APH)-2022-3-18
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on March 09,2022

Gummalla Siva Kumar Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY,J. - (1.) This Criminal Petition under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is filed to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest. The petitioners are A-1 and A-3 in Crime No.3 of 2022 of Kondepi Police Station, Prakasam District. A case under Ss. 420, 468, 323, 509, 506 r/w 34 IPC was registered against them along with other accused in the above crime. Briefly stated, it is the case of the prosecution that the petitioners are the Secretary and the Treasurer respectively of Sri Vigneswara Educational Society. It is alleged that the petitioners have fabricated certain documents like plan and building permission and other certificates with forged signatures of the issuing authority and without there being any resolution passed by the Society for sale of the landed property of the Society that they have clandestinely sold away the land of the Society on the basis of the aforesaid forged and fake documents. It is also alleged that they have also encashed the Fixed Deposit amount which is deposited in the Andhra Bank relating to the said society. When one of the complainants by name C. Lakshmi Manasa questioned the said acts of the accused, A-4 abused her in filthy language and A-3 provoked A-1, A-2 and A-4 and they all beat her and caused injuries. Therefore, it is stated that the petitioners along with other accused have committed the aforesaid offences. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that no specific overt acts relating to the petitioners herein, who are A-1 and A-3, are given regarding the offence said to have been committed punishable under Sec. 323 IPC. He would further submit that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and that they did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Therefore, he would pray for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the Criminal Petition. He would submit that a very clear allegation is made against the petitioners herein that they have fabricated documents and thereafter sold away the property of the Society without there being any resolution passed to that effect and they have also withdrawn the money invested in Fixed Deposit. He further submits that when the same is questioned that they also beat the 2nd complainant herein. So, he would submit that having regard to the seriousness of the offence that the petitioners are not entitled for anticipatory bail and thereby prayed for dismissal of the Criminal Petition. Admittedly, the petitioners herein are the Secretary and the Treasurer of Sri Vigneswara Educational Society. The said material fact is not disputed before this Court. As per the allegations set out in the F.I.R, it is alleged that the petitioners herein have fabricated a plan and building permission and other certificates and they also forged the signatures of the issuing authority of the said documents and on the basis of the said forged and fake documents that they sold the landed property belonging to the Society and also encashed the Fixed Deposit amount in Andhra Bank which belongs to the Society. Therefore, having regard to the seriousness of the said offence in which the petitioners are involved and as the accusation made against the petitioners is prima facie well founded from the material available on record, in the said facts and circumstances of the case, as it is a case of illegally selling away the landed property of the Society and siphoning of the money of the Society, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners are not entitled for anticipatory bail. In fact, having regard to the seriousness of the said offence in which the petitioners are involved, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Therefore, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, as the offences registered against the petitioners are punishable with less than seven (07) years period of imprisonment, the Investigating Officer shall follow the procedure contemplated under Sec. 41A Cr.P.C against the petitioners. ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.