BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 1 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

****

CRIMINAL PETITION No.3887 OF 2024

Between:

1. K.C.Krishna Reddy, S/o.Late K.C.Rami Reddy,

Aged 64 years, R/o.D.No.26-4-1628-A1,

Jayan Tej Nilayam, Melapuram, SBI Colony,

Hindupur Town and Mandal,

Sri Satya Sai District.

2. K.C.Nagarjuna Reddy, S/o.Krishna Reddy,

Aged 32 years, R/o.D.No.26-4-1628-A1,

Jayan Tej Nilayam, Melapuram, SBI Colony,

Hindupur Town and Mandal,

Sri Satya Sai District.

3. K.C.Sai Prasad Reddy, S/o.K.C.Krishna Reddy,

Aged 30 years, R/o.D.No.26-4-1628-A1,

Jayan Tej Nilayam, Melapuram, SBI Colony,

Hindupur Town and Mandal,

Sri Satya Sai District. … Petitioners/A-1 to A-3

Versus

The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its

Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh

at Amaravati.

... Respondent/Respondent

* * * * *

DATE OF ORDER PRONOUNCED : 07.08.2024.

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 2 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL :

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI

1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers

may be allowed to see the Order? Yes/No

2. Whether the copy of Order may be

marked to Law Reporters/Journals? Yes/No

3. Whether His Lordship wish to see the

fair copy of the Order? Yes/No

JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 3 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

* HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI

+ CRIMINAL PETITION No.3887 OF 2024

% 07.08.2024

# Between:

1. K.C.Krishna Reddy, S/o.Late K.C.Rami Reddy,

Aged 64 years, R/o.D.No.26-4-1628-A1,

Jayan Tej Nilayam, Melapuram, SBI Colony,

Hindupur Town and Mandal,

Sri Satya Sai District.

2. K.C.Nagarjuna Reddy, S/o.Krishna Reddy,

Aged 32 years, R/o.D.No.26-4-1628-A1,

Jayan Tej Nilayam, Melapuram, SBI Colony,

Hindupur Town and Mandal,

Sri Satya Sai District.

3. K.C.Sai Prasad Reddy, S/o.K.C.Krishna Reddy,

Aged 30 years, R/o.D.No.26-4-1628-A1,

Jayan Tej Nilayam, Melapuram, SBI Colony,

Hindupur Town and Mandal,

Sri Satya Sai District. … Petitioners/A-1 to A-3

Versus

The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its

Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh

At Amaravati.

... Respondent/Respondent

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 4 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

!

Counsel for the petitioners : Sri Posani Venkateswarlu

^

Counsel for the Respondent

/State

:

Sri A.Sai Rohith, learned

Assistant Public Prosecutor

for State.

< Gist:

> Head Note:

? Cases referred:

1. Union of India Vs. State of Maharashtra and others

reported in 2020 (4) SCC 761.

2. Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra

and others reported in 2011 (1) SCC 694.

This Court made the following:

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 5 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

APHC010245432024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3368]

WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3887/2024

Between:

K C Krishna Reddy and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):

1. P VIVEK

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

1. ABDUS SALEEM

2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)

The Court made the following:

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 6 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI

CRIMINAL PETITION No.3887 OF 2024

O R D E R:

This petition is filed U/s.438 of Code of Criminal Procedure,

1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’) to direct the respondent/police

to enlarge the petitioners/A-1 to A-3 on bail in the event of their arrest in

connection with Cr.No.103/2024 of Dharmavaram I Town Police Station,

Sri Satya Sai District.

02. The contention of the petitioners is that they were implicated as

A-1 to A-3 in the above crime for the offence under sections 302, 201,

120-B r/w.149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as

‘I.P.C.’) and section 3(2)(v) of SC and ST (POA) Act 2015, which was

registered basing on a written report presented by Mr.Birru Rajasekhar

(hereinafter referred to as ‘defacto-complainant’), father of Mr.Birru

Sampath Kumar (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’).

03. The case of the defacto-complainant is that the deceased was

practising as an advocate at Hindupur and also working as National

Secretary of National Students Union of India (N.S.U.I.) and In-charge of

Kerala State. The deceased and one Mr.Srikanth are friends. There

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 7 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

were disputes between Srikanth and A-1 with respect to a land situated

at Melapuram Cross, Hindupur Town. The deceased was supporting

Mr.Srikanth. The deceased was threatened by one Ramanji (A-4) and

others over phone for supporting Mr.Srikanth. On 29.05.2024 the

deceased informed defacto-complainant that he is going to Court. On

30.05.2024 at about 09.00 a.m. the defacto-complainant came to know

that the body of his son was found on Dharmavaram-Yellukuntla road.

Immediately, the defacto-complainant went to the spot, and found body

of his son with injuries. Therefore, he presented the report to the police.

The same was registered as a case in Cr.No.103/2024 of Dharmavaram

I Town Police Station.

04. The 1

st

petitioner is practising as an advocate. The 2

nd

petitioner is

son of the 1

st

petitioner and he is also practising as an advocate. The 3

rd

petitioner is the son of the 1

st

petitioner, studied M.B.B.S., appearing for

Post Graduate entrance examination staying at Hyderabad.

05. The deceased and his friend Mr.Srikanth were involved in real

estate disputes. Several criminal cases were registered against the

deceased and Mr.Srikanth. Police opened a rowdy sheet against the

deceased and Mr.Srikanth. The petitioners are no way concerned with

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 8 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

the death of the deceased. The suspicion of the defacto-complainant is

baseless and unfounded. No prima facie case is established against the

petitioners.

06. There are no allegations in the report presented to the police that

the deceased was murdered, as he belongs to Scheduled Caste or

Scheduled Tribe to attract the offence U/s.3(2)(v) of SC and ST (POA)

Act, 2015. Hence, the anticipatory bail application is maintainable, in

view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Union of

India Vs. State of Maharashtra and others

1

.

07. The petitioners filed a civil suit in O.S.34/2023 on the file of II

Addl.District Judge, Hindupur, against Mr.Srikanth and others for

recovery of amount. Mr.Srikanth threatened the 1

st

petitioner and tried to

kill him. The 1

st

petitioner presented a report against Mr.Srikanth and

others. The same was registered as a case in Cr.No.251/2023 of

Hindupur I Town Police Station.

08. The petitioners are ready and willing to co-operate with the

investigation. The police are trying to arrest the petitioners. If the

1

2020 (4) SCC 761

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 9 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

petitioners are arrested, they will suffer irreparable loss and hardship.

Hence, they filed the application for anticipatory bail.

09. The defacto-complainant was impleaded as 2

nd

respondent and

represented by a counsel Mr.Abdus Saleem.

10. Sri A.Sai Rohith, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor took notice

on behalf of the State.

11. Heard Sri Posani Venkateswarlu, learned Senior Counsel for the

petitioners, Sri A.Sai Rohith, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor

representing State and Sri Abdus Saleem, learned counsel for the

defacto-complainant/2

nd

respondent.

12. Sri P.Venkateswarlu, learned Senior Counsel representing the

petitioners would submit that perusal of the report submitted by the

defacto-complainant on 30.05.2024 do not disclose any prima facie case

against the petitioners to connect them with the alleged offence, except

suspecting the role of the petitioners in the alleged offence. He would

further submit that police during the course of investigation arrested A-4

and A-6 to A-9 on 11.06.2024 and A-4 confessed about the murder of

the deceased, he made a statement that at the instance of the

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 10 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

petitioners, the deceased was murdered with the assistance of A-5 to.

A-9.

13. The learned Senior Counsel would further submit that the alleged

confession statement of A-4 cannot be used against the petitioners as it

was not corroborated by any other evidence to show that the petitioners

engaged the other accused for committing murder of the deceased;

Therefore, there is no prima facie case against the petitioners to connect

them with the offence U/s.302 I.P.C; there is no material on record to

show that the deceased was murdered, as he belongs to Scheduled

Caste or Scheduled Tribe Community; The petitioners No.1 and 2 are

practising advocates at Hindupur and the 3

rd

petitioner is a doctor and

appearing for Post Graduate examinations; and therefore, there is no

question of their fleeing; In the said circumstances, they may be

enlarged on anticipatory bail.

14. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing State would

submit that the material collected during investigation would disclose

that the death of the deceased is homicide; The deceased belongs to

Scheduled Caste community; There were disputes between the

petitioners and Mr.Srikanth, who is friend of the deceased relating to

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 11 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

house site located in Hindupur Town; The deceased and Mr.Srikanth are

good friends and the deceased supporting Mr.Srikanth; The petitioners

filed suit against Mr.Srikanth for recovery of money, which relates to the

civil dispute; The petitioners also filed criminal case against Mr.Srikanth

alleging that he tried to kill the 1

st

petitioner; All these circumstances

would show strong motive for the petitioners to commit the offence in

the case.

15. He would further submit that during investigation, police arrested

A-4 and A-6 to A-9 on 11.06.2024; they confessed about the role of the

petitioners; Huge money was recovered from the possession of arrested

accused, paid to them as consideration for committing murder of the

deceased; He also submitted that police during investigation seized the

mobile phones of A-4 and A-6 to A-9; they verified the call data records

of the petitioners and the arrested accused; found several exchange of

calls before the murder, and after the murder of the deceased between

the 1

st

petitioner and the arrested accused; mobile phones were sent for

forensic examination for recovery of certain information exchanged

between the petitioners and the arrested accused; Therefore, all these

circumstances prima facie corroborate the confessional statements of

A-4 and A-6 to A-9; and establish the role of petitioners in the murder of

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 12 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

the deceased; Hence, considering the nature of offence, gravity of

offence and seriousness of the accusations, the petitioners cannot be

enlarged on anticipatory bail, as there is every likelihood of petitioners

interfering with the investigation to tamper the evidence, which will

hamper the progress of the investigation.

16. The learned counsel representing defacto-complainant re-stated

the argument submitted by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.

17. In the light of above rival contentions, the point for consideration in

this petition is as under:

“Whether the petitioners/A-1 to A-3 can be enlarged on

anticipatory bail?”

18. POINT:

It is an undisputed fact that the defacto-complainant presented the

report to police on 30.05.2024 that his son dead body was found on the

outskirts of Dharmavaram Town with injuries. It is also an undisputed

fact that the deceased and one Mr.Srikanth are good friends. The

petitioners No.1 and 2 are practising advocates at Hindupur. So also, the

deceased and Mr.Srikanth. It appears that there are disputes between

Mr.Srikanth and petitioners with regard to a house site located in

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 13 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

Hindupur Town near the house of the 1

st

petitioner. In that connection,

the 1

st

petitioner filed a suit for recovery of money against Mr.Srikanth.

He also filed a criminal case against Mr.Srikanth and others for attempt

to murder.

19. Police produced Part-I Case Diary pertaining to the case.

Verification of the same would show that the police arrested A-4 and A-6

to A-9 during the course of investigation on 11.06.2024 and recorded

their confessional statements. A-4 confessed that he engaged A-5 to A-9

at the instance of the petitioners for committing murder of Srikanth and

his friend Mr.B.Sampath Kumar i.e., deceased; On 29.05.2024 They

found the deceased in the town; using the relations between one of the

accused and deceased, they took him to some lonely place, consumed

alcohol; later attacked him with deadly weapons and killed him; shifted

the dead body in a car and dumped it on the outskirts of Dharmavaram

Town. It appears that Police during investigation seized huge amount of

cash of nearly Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs) and odd from the

possession of arrested accused. They confessed that it was paid to

them by the petitioners towards ‘SUPARI’ for killing the deceased and

his friend Mr.Srikanth. It also appears that police during investigation

collected Call Data Records relating to the petitioners and arrested

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 14 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

accused; verified the same; Found exchange of calls between the 1

st

petitioner and the arrested accused one day prior to the murder of

deceased and after the murder of the deceased. Therefore, material

collected during the investigation as on the day, prima facie reveals the

role and complicity of the petitioners for the offence U/s.302 I.P.C.

r/w.120-B and 34 I.P.C.

20. Further, it appears that the police could not arrest the petitioners,

as they are at large from the date of incident in the case.

21. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa

Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others

2

held that “in a case of

anticipatory bail, the complaint filed against the accused to be examined

as to whether he filed a false or frivolous complaint, whether there is any

family dispute between accused and the complainant, gravity of charge

and role of accused, seriousness of the accusations, and discretion to

grant anticipatory bail must be exercised on the basis of available

material and facts of the particular case and whether the accused has

joined the investigation and co-operating with the Investigation Agency

and he is not likely to abscond”.

2

2011 (1) SCC 694

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 15 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

22. In the case on hand, the material discussed above would prima

facie show involvement of the petitioners in the offence U/s.302 I.P.C.

They are at large from the date of offence. Therefore, basing on the

material available, considering the nature of offence, gravity of offence,

and seriousness of the accusations, this Court is of the considered

opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory

bail. Accordingly, the point is answered.

23. Before parting with the matter, the Court intends to emphasize an

aspect relating to maintenance of Part-1 case dairies by the investigating

agencies. Investigation Agency produced bunch of papers styled as

Part-I Case Diary. Verification of the same, it is noticed that it is not

maintained as per section 172 Cr.P.C., which is as under:

172. Diary of proceedings in investigation.

(1) Every police officer making an investigation under this Chapter shall

day by day enter his proceedings in the investigation in a diary, setting

forth the time at which the information reached him, the time at which he

began and closed his investigation, the place or places visited by him,

and statement of the circumstances ascertained through his

investigation.

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 16 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

[(1-A) The statements of witnesses recorded during the course of

investigation under Section 161 shall be inserted in the case diary.

(1-B) The diary referred to in sub-section (1) shall be a volume and

duly paginated.]

Therefore investigating Officers shall maintain Part-I Case Diary as

mandated by the law stated above. It will assist the cause of the justice.

Hence, this Court of the considered opinion that it necessary to inform

and instruct the Head of Police in the State, to give necessary

instructions to all the Investigation Officers in the State to maintain Part-I

Case Diary in accordance with 172 Cr.P.C., corresponding to section

192 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2022.

24. In that view of the matter, the Registrar (General) of this Court is

directed to send a copy of this order to the Director General of Police,

Andhra Pradesh State, Mangalagiri, for issuing suitable instructions to all

the Investigation Officers in the State, about maintenance of Part-I Case

Diary, which would ensure the authenticity of records and enhance the

credibility of Investigation Agencies, in the State.

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 17 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

25. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall

stand closed.

________________________

B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI, J

07.08.2024

psk

L.R.Copy is to be marked

B/o. psk

BVLNC,J CRL.P.No.3887 of 2024

Page 18 of 18 DT: 07.08.2024

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI

1

CRL.PETITION No.3887 OF 2024

Note: Mark L.R. Copy

psk

07

th

August, 2024

W

psk