CRLP/15428/2013 of Marapu Kantha Rao Vs The State of A.P., through S.H.O. on 31 December 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABADTUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN :PRESENT:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE: R. KANTHA RAO

CRIMINAL PETITION NO : 15428 OF 2013

Between:

Marapu Kantha Rao S/o Kanakaiah

...Petitioner(Accused No. 3 in Cr. No. 270 of 2013 on the file of Kusumanchi P.S., Khammam District)AND

The State of A.P., through SHO, Kusumanchi Police Station, Khammam District,rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad.

...Respondent/Respondent

COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER : Sri K. M. Krishna ReddyCOUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT : The Additional Public Prosecutor Petition under Sections 437 & 439 of Crl. P.C praying that inthe circumstances stated in the petition and the memo of groundsfiled herein, the High Court maybe pleased to enlarge thepetitioner/A3 on bail in connection with Crime No. 270 of 2013 ofKusumanchi Police Station, Khammam District.

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER :

“This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner-A3 under Sections 437and 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking bail in Crime No.270 of2013 of Kusumanchi Police Station, Khammam District, registered for theoffence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 468 and 471 read with 34 ofIPC.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner – A3 and thelearned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-state.

3. It is mentioned in the remand report that A1 and A2, who are thebank officials, were taking amounts from the customers under credit formsand giving counterfoils, but did not deposit the said amounts into theconcerned accounts. It is further stated that they maintained anunauthorized account and a register by making forged signatures of thecustomers on the withdrawal forms with the assistance of A4. Petitioner-A3is said to be the Field Officer. His name is not mentioned in the FIR. Afterthe arrest of A1 and A2, basing on their confessional statements it seemsthat the name of the petitioner-A3 is included in the present case. Theremand report also does not show about the involvement of the petitioner-A3 in the commission of alleged offence. The petitioner has been in judicialcustody since 07.11.2013. In view of the aforesaid facts, I am inclined togrant bail to the petitioner-A3.

(Contd. 2. )

To

4.

In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed and thepetitioner-A3 is therefore ordered to be released on bail on hisexecuting a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees tenthousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to thesatisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate(Special Mobile), at Khammam.”

ASSISTANT

REGISTRAR/ TRUE COPY //

for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR