STATE OF TELANGANA Vs. BODA CHINNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to cancel the bail granted to respondent No.1/A1 by the Court below vide order dated 11.10.2021 in Crl.M.P.No.370 of 2021 in Crime No.111 of 2021 of Tirumalayapalem Police Station.

(2.) Learned Public Prosecutor submits that A1 to A3 and D1 to D3 belong to the same village and in view of civil disputes between them, in order to kill D1 to D3, A1 and A2 went to L.Ws.3 to 5 and served liquor without adding poison, but, served liquor to D1 to D3 by adding poison, and after consuming the same, D1 to D3 went to unconscious state, upon which, they were shifted to Government Hospital and thereafter, the doctors confirmed that they died. Thereupon, Crime No.111 of 2021 was registered by the Station House Officer, Tirumalayapalem Police Station, for the offences punishable under Section 302 IPC read with 34 IPC. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 11.10.2021 passed by the Court below in Crl.M.P.No.370 of 2021. In the said order, the Court below has recorded the contentions of the learned counsel for the respondents herein, who are A1 to A3 therein, particularly, as far as respondent Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, that A2 is an old man of 70 years suffering from old aged ailments and A3 has undergone a surgery and is facing difficulty in attending the calls of nature. However, a counter was filed by the prosecution stating the reasons as to why bail should not be granted to the accused and that investigation is pending. But, the Court below without giving any reason, only by observing that major part of the investigation was completed, has granted bail to the respondents herein/A1 to A3. He further submits that in view of this incident, there is law and order problem in the Village and as the accused persons are on bail, there is likelihood that they may threaten/influence the witnesses. He relied on the order passed in Sonu v. Sonu Yadav and Another(Crl.A.No.377 of 2021 dated 05.04.2021), in which, the Apex Court observed that seriousness of the offences has to be evaluated in the background of the allegations and any order without reasons is fundamentally contrary to the norms, which guide the judicial process and there has to be judicious application of mind while deciding an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and that reasons in support of the orders granting bail comport with a judicial process which brings credibility to the administration of criminal justice. Hence, he prays that the bail granted to the respondents/A1 to A.3 by the Court below vide order dated 11.10.2021 in Crl.M.P.No.370 of 2021 may be cancelled.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents/A1 to A3 submits that the Court below having taken into consideration the averments in the counter and the contentions of both the parties, granted bail, as such, it cannot be said that there is no application of mind. He further submits that as major part of the investigation is completed as per the averments in the counter, the Court below has come to the conclusion that major part of the investigation is completed and thereby, granted bail to the respondents herein/A1 to A3, as such, the same does not warrant interference by this Court.