Telangana High Court
CRLP/9364/2012 of Janardhan (Phd. TS), Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 December 2012
SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Criminal Petition No.9364 of 2012 ORDER:- The petitioners are A .1 and A .3 in Crime No.197 of 2011 of Osmania University P.S., registered for the offence under Section 3(I) (II)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDYCriminal Petition No.9364 of 2012
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:-
The petitioners are A.1 and A.3 in Crime No.197 of 2011 ofOsmania University P.S., registered for the offence under Section 3(I)(II)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention ofAtrocities) Act.
The accusation made against the petitioners is that the theyobstructed the complainant from organizing Beef festival and damagedbeef curry and abused the complainant and others in the name of theircaste.
The petitioners earlier approached this Court for grant ofanticipatory bail and the same came to be dismissed as withdrawnvide Criminal Petition No.8650 of 2012 dated 10-12-2012.
Heard Sri N.Ramachandar Rao, learned Senior counselappearing for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutorappearing for the respondent-State.
It is contended by the learned senior counsel that Memo dated17-9-2012 issued by JNU has been upheld by the Delhi High Court inW.P. (C) No.5915/2012 dated 19-92012. Copy of the order passed inW.P. (C) No.5915 of 2012 has been placed on record. By referring theabove memo, the learned senior counsel contends that the petitionersdeserve for grant of anticipatory bail.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for therespondent-State opposed the application.
Under Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and ScheduledTribes (Prevention of Attrocities) Act, 1989, the provisions of Section438 of Cr.P.C. are not made applicable to the persons accused ofoffences punishable under the provisions of the Act. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. However, the petitioners are at liberty to surrender themselves beforethe Designated Court for trial of offences under the Scheduled Castesand Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Attrocities) Act, Secunderabad,and move an application seeking for regular bail. In which event, thelearned Special Judge has to consider the application on the sameday, as practicably as possible..
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
31[st] December, 2012smr/gkv
_________________________
B.Seshasayana Reddy, J