TADI DURGA KOTESH ALIAS SIDDA KOTESH, YEARS v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGHSTATION
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
In the result, the Criminal Appeal is allowed
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 372, 374(2), 378(4)
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
- S.Cs and S.Ts (P.O.A) Act
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 480
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 324
Key paragraphs
- Para 99. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. Dated:27.01.2026 Pmk _______________________________ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI 7 35 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL APPEAL No: 28 of 2026 Date: 27.01.2026 Pmk
Judgment
Cause title
Counsel for the Appellant(S):
1. Y SUDHAKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 28 of 2026
J U D G M E N T:
Heard Sri Y.Sudhakar, learned counsel appellants/A1 and A2 and Sri P.Somayaji, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State/R1.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that notice was taken to victim as required under Section 15(A) of the SCs & STs (PoA) Act, 2015 on 21.01.2026, no one filed vakalat representing for the complainant/victim/R2. No objections filed for the victim opposing the appeal.
The appeal is filed under Section 14-A of the SCs & STs (PoA) Act r/w Section 480 of B.N.S.S., 2023 challenging the order dated 22.12.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1290 of 2025 in Crime No.168 of 2025 of Seethanagaram Police Station, East Godavari District.
Learned counsel for the appellants/A1 & A2 would submit that the appellants/A1 & A2 were arrested on 13.10.2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 115(2), 351(2) r/w 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of SCs & STs (PoA) 4 Amendment Act, 2015 in Crime No.168 of 2025 of Seethanagaram Police Station, East Godavari District. The appellants/A1 & A2 are in prison from the date of arrest i.e., more than 100 days. Investigation in the case has been completed. Charge sheet was filed on 27.10.2025. The learned Trial Court dismissed the application under the impugned order on the ground that the appellants/A1 & A2 involved in another crime of similar nature, and therefore, filing of charge sheet is not a ground to consider the bail.
He would further submit that earlier offence is under Section 324 of I.P.C. a bailable offence. Further, police issued notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. for that offence, and therefore, that offence will not come in the way of granting bail in the present case, but the learned trial Court erroneously dismissed the bail application, though there is a fit case releasing the accused/A1 & A2 on bail.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would concede that earlier offence is punishable under Section 324 of IPC and police issued notice to the appellants/A1 & A2 under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and charge sheet was also filed. 5
Considering the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the order of the learned Trial Court on the ground that earlier accused/A1 & A2 involved in similar offence is erroneous, and is liable to be set aside.
Operative part
In the result, the Criminal Appeal is allowed. The order dated 22.12.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1290 of 2025 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs & STs (PoA) Act-cum-X Additional District Judge, Rajamahendravaram, connected with Crime No.168 of 2025 of Seethanagaram Police Station, East Godavari District is set aside. The appellants/A1 & A2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to the following conditions. i) The appellants/A1 & A2 shall be enlarged on bail, on executing a personal bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each, with two (02) sureties for a like sum each, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs & STs (PoA) Act-cum-X Additional District Judge, Rajamahendravaram. ii) The appellants/A1 & A2 shall not leave the country without permission of the learned Special Court. iii) The appellants/A1 and A2 shall not intimidate or annoy the victim or his family members in any manner. 6 iv) If the appellants/A1 & A2 violate any of the above conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to file an application before the concerned Special Court for cancellation of this order, on filing of such application, the concerned Special Court shall dispose of the same in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is allowed. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. Dated:27.01.2026 Pmk _______________________________ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI 7 35 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI CRIMINAL APPEAL No: 28 of 2026 Date: 27.01.2026 Pmk
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In the result, the Criminal Appeal is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 372, 374(2), 378(4); Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151; S.Cs and S.Ts (P.O.A) Act; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 480; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 324.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 27 Jan 2026. The bench was B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.