Criminal Petition No. 10177 of 2009. Case: Madapuram Yogeswara Naidu S/o Late Rangappa Naidu and Ors. Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P.. High Court of Andhra Pradesh (India)

Case NumberCriminal Petition No. 10177 of 2009
CounselFor Appellant: O. Kailashnath Reddy, Adv. And For Respondents: Public Prosecutor
JudgesB. Chandra Kumar, J.
IssueCriminal Procedure Code (CrPC) - Sections 167, 209 and 309; Constitution of India - Article 21
Judgement DateDecember 15, 2009
CourtHigh Court of Andhra Pradesh (India)


B. Chandra Kumar, J., (At Hyderabad)

  1. Heard Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri C. Nageswara Rao, learned Public Prosecutor.

  2. The petitioners herein are A5 to A16. They are seeking regular bail. All the petitioners except A16 are in judicial custody since last week of May 2008 and A16 is in judicial custody since first week of June 2008 i.e., nearly for about 1 1/2 years. It is also not in dispute that the charge sheet has been filed in this case on 19.08.2008. The petitioners herein and others earlier approached this Court and filed a bail petition in Criminal Petition No. 2948 of 2009, and this Court, by order dated 06.05.2009, dismissed the said petition. However, the petitioners in that petition i.e., A1 and A4 are not the petitioners herein. Subsequently, they have filed another bail petition in Criminal Petition No. 3913 of 2009 and the said petition was also dismissed on 10.12.2009. This Court, while dismissing the petition in Crl.P. No. 2948 of 2009 on 06.05.2009 directed the learned Sessions Judge to complete the trial within a period of three months from the date of said order and if necessary by giving day to day postings. It was also observed that if any accused are absconding the case against such persons should be separated and trial against the accused who are available should be completed as early as possible. In spite of giving specific direction by this Court as long as on 06.05.2009, it is most unfortunate that till today the trial is not yet commenced. It appears from the arguments of Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and Sri C. Nageswara Rao, learned Public Prosecutor, that even charges have not been framed against the accused on the ground of absence of one or two accused on each date of their appearance before the learned Sessions Judge.

  3. Sri C. Padmanabha Reddy, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, submits that as far as the present petitioners are concerned, the allegation against them is that they hurled bombs. His submission is that omnibus allegations have been made against all the accused as if they hurled country made bombs and caused injuries to the deceased. It is also his submission that though the other accused persons have been enlarged on bail no untoward incident has been reported. It is also his submission that most of the petitioners are agricultural labourers and they are the earning members of...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT