ALAPARTHI CHINNA Vs. KOTA LAKSHMI SATYANARAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/defacto-complainant filed this petition under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C for canceling bail granted to the 1st respondent/accused in Crl.P. No. 7709 of 2011 on 06.09.2011 by this Court in Crime No. 73/2011 of I Town Police station, Tenali, Guntur District on the ground that by the time order of bail was passed by this Court, the accused was not arrested and remanded to judicial custody and that by misrepresentation of facts, the 1st respondent/accused obtained bail in this crime from this Court.

(2.) The 1st respondent/accused is accused of offences punishable under Sections 420, 323, 506, 509 I.P.C and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It is alleged that the accused obtained Rs.30,000/-from the defacto-complainant for securing job as Aaya to her on daily wages and that he failed to secure the job and that when the defacto-complainant demanded for return of the said amount, the accused abused her in the name of her Madiga caste in filthy language and threatened her with dire consequences. The case was booked by the police on 30.06.2011 on report given by the defacto-complainant. This Court noted in the order dated 06.09.2011 that the accused was arrested on 31.07.2011 and had been in custody since then. It is pointed out by the petitioner's counsel that though the accused was taken into custody by the police during the course of investigation, he was neither arrested nor produced before the Magistrate nor the Magistrate remanded the accused to judicial custody. It is also pointed out by the petitioner's counsel that when the accused approached the Sessions Court for bail under Sections 437 and 439 Cr.P.C, the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur by order dated 23.08.2011 dismissed bail petition of the accused on the ground that he was not remanded to judicial custody by the Magistrate and that there was no material to show arrest or remand of the accused to judicial custody and that the accused was not produced before the Magistrate.

(3.) This Court in this petition called for report of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tenali Sub-Division who is the investigating officer in this crime. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tenali Sub-Division filed report by way of affidavit dated 12.12.2011 in this Court. Relevant portion of the said report reads: