Criminal Appeal No. -123 of 2025 · Andhra Pradesh High Court · 2025

Counsel forthe Petitioner .-sri v R Reddy Kowuri Counsel for the Respondent : Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshml', Assistant Public Prosecutor. The Court made the following ORDER-. / APHCO10108122025 lN THE HIGH couRT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl I(Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE ll^/EN'TY FIRST DAY OF MARCH T\^/O THOUSANID AND ll^/ENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTle''E VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL APPEAL'NO: 123/2025 Between:

1.VARRA RAVINDRA REDDY, S/O SURYA NARAYANA REDDY, AGED BOUT 37 YEARS, OCC UNEMPLOYED R/O. D.NO.12/14, KONDAREDDY PALLl, AGADUR, KONDAREDDY PALLl, VEMULA MANDAL, Y.S.R DISTRICT.

1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA`'`PRADESH, REP., BY ZITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT.`BuILDINGS, AMARAVATHI. ..AND ...APELLANT Counsel for the AppeIIant:

1.V R REDDY KOWURI Counsel for the Respondent:

1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: JUDGMENT : I-\`' I- I.a- ...RESPODENT The instant criminal appeal ri'as been filed by the AppeIIant/Accused seeking to set aside the Order dated 10.02.2025 passed in CrI.M.P.No.90 of 2025 in Crime No.232 of|``--2o24 on the file of the court of Special Judge for trial of cases `under sos & STs (PoA) Act-Gum-VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ananthapuramu and to release him on bail.

2. This is a case of public mischief, criminal intimidatI|On, Promotion Of enmity between two groups causing wide publicity through the electronic t,( device with criminal intention by humiliating a scheduled caste person by '\ ( E= 2 '! touching his caste, in the Facebook and in Social media that occurred prior ui) to o9.ll.2024 at Madakasira Town. lt is alleged that the Appellant/Accused made derogatory and hatred comments against the De facfo Coma/a,'r,ant, who is the M.L.S of Madakasira Assembly Constituency belongs to Scheduled Caste and posted false alleg.atiOnS and threatening messages against him knowingly he belongs to Scheduled Caste, humiliated him by S|.I I touching his caste, threatened him with dire_ consequences and thereby caused mischief among the public and defamed his image. Based on the complaint lodged by the De facfo Comp/a,'nar,f a case in Crime No.232 of 2024 on the file of Madakasira Police Station, Sri Satya Sai District for the offences under sections 353(2), 351 (2) and 196 of BNS, Section 67 of the Income Tax Act 2000-2008 and Section 3(2) (va) of SCs & STs (PoA) Act, has been registered against the Appellant/Accused. i _

3. Heard Sri V.R.Reddy Kow'uri, learned counsel for the AppellanVAccused and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public prosecutor, representing the state/Respohderlt.

4. Learned counsel for the Appellant/Accused would submit that all the offences registered against the Appellant are bailable in nature. Learned counsel would further submit that, in view of the political rivalry, several other crimes were also registered against the Appellant, wherein, he was granted bail. Learned counsel would flirther Submit that, nO Pr,'ma faC,'e case is made out against the Appellant for the alleged offences. Learned counsel for the Appellant would further Submit that the Appellant has been in i. I ^ z;, oft/<, a,, . 3 jail since 28.12.2024 and material .part of the investigation is completed. J, Hence, prayed to enlarge the Appellant on bail.

5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the appeal and would submit that twenty other cases were also registered against the Appellant and in some cases the Appellant wa`s granted bail. lt is submitted that there I.'. j are specific allegations against the-.Appel.Iant in the commission of alleged offences. There are no grounds to grant bail to the Appellant. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the Appeal.

6. The bail application filed before the trial Co'urt has been dismissed v,'de order dated 10.02.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.90 of 2025 on the ground that the allegations made against the Appellant are serious and some more witnesses were to be examined, the investigat'lon was pending for collecting technical evidence and the App6llant herein involved in some more 1| offences.

7. Admittedly, there is political ri'Jalry.between the De facfo Coma/a,'nanf and the Appellant since they both belong to rival political groups. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Appellant that the Appellant has been in judicial remand since 28.12.2024 and that material part of the investigation has been completed and that the Appellant was granted bail in other cases which were lodged against him, this Court is of the view -E..£ that it is not the stage to decide the culpability of the Appellant / Accused in the \ i=. commiss|lon of the alleged offences, by accepting the allegat-Ions against him and it requires examination at full length of trial. In such circumstances, this Court is `aERI . .- •., -t t I.nCII'ned to enlarge the AppeIIant / Accused on baI®I. However, lt ls made clear that the observations made i,n this Appeal are with regard to granting of ba" to the Appellant / Accused, but not on the m6rjts of the case.

8. ln the result, the crI'mI-hal Appeal js allowed settl'ng asI'de the Order dated 10.02.2025 passed l'n crI.M.P.No.90 of 2025 I-n crI'me No.232 of 2024 -I-L|_ _ I.I on the fI'le of the Court of special Judge for trial of (POA) Act-Gum-vlll AddI-tjOnal District andi sessions Judge, Ananthapuramu __ __I-l\+|||| and consequently ba" IS granted to the Appellant /Accused on the followlng cases under scs & sTs COndl'tI'Ons.I I_i I. The Appellant / Accused sha" be released on ba" on hl's executl'ng a personal bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousands only) with two suretles for a llke sum each to the satI'Sfactl'on of the learned Judl'cla' First class Magistrate, Madakasl'ra, srI' Sathya sai D,'strl'ct. I On release, the Appellant Officer, concerned, once A - -- 10.00 a.m. and o5.00 p.m., tl-l' fl'Ijng of the charge sheet. sha" appear before the station House I'n a week l'.a nn a,,nH_.. I_ , __, _llv. ,ll a WeeK I.e., on Sunday between If,I. The Appellant is directed not to hamper the jnvestlgatl'on and tamper w,-th the prosecution wl-tnesses. IV. ltl's made clear that the Appellant sha" scrupulously comply wl-th above cond,'tl'ons and breach of any of the above condjtl-ons be vleWed serl|ously and DrOSeftHtI'nn l'e -+ I,'L-I I _ ____ v~HUuOly and PrOSeCutl'on l's at ll'berty to move an :__1. application for canceHatjon of the ba". ---|'u'|lv'IO As a sequel thereto, mI'SCellaneous petjtl'ons pendlng, jf any, sha" stand closed. /,,> , \` To, //TRUE COPY// For Sd/-B. CHITTJ' JOSELOH TRAR 1 The speclaI Court for Trlal of cases under sc & sT (Preventlon ofAtrocltles) Act 1989-Gum-vll' Addltlona' Dlstnct and sess,ons Judge, Ananthapuramu Dl|strl-ct. SECTION OFFICER 2, The J[Jr'l'nI-aI M_a.-_1__, 3. The 4. The 5. one Judl'claI MagIStrate of Flrst class, Madakaslra, satya sal DIStrlct. superl'ntendent, central prlson, Kadapa, ysR Kadapa D,'strlct sc±aEtitoo.n^ sHhrR uSeR-±REgI-d€€`iaKdrora*uO:n=skdaavaErop±I;C±e;SnSt=R:IS^na`:gPa€ie igt:r;:i:;ri ct Ore _to._ s_ri y.-R _ki55; k5:#uI-:sXdav:ro:i+cae [s^tra:.Ilo_n` _ __ |v uH V K t<eddy Kowurj, Advocate [opucJ _.__ _`ulIUII, Oalya t5a, DI-Stn'ct. r\^_ I_ -I ._ _ --' '`''`^+|u\al cvss76 5#: scpcasr:ocp:upbylIC Prosecutor (AP) HIgh Court of Andhra pradesh [ouT] I HIGH COURT Dr.VJP,J DATED..21 /03/2025 ORDER CRLA.No.123 of 2025 ALLOWED .-. . `--,,,I. -. --.=S-